1

1 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 August 17th, 2004 25

2

1 Appearances 2 3 Derry Millar ) Commission Counsel 4 Susan Vella ) 5 Donald Worme, Q.C. ) 6 Katherine Hensel ) 7 8 Murray Klippenstein ) The Estate of Dudley 9 Vilko Zbogar ) (np) George and George Andrew 10 Andrew Okin ) Family Group 11 12 Peter Rosenthal ) Aazhoodena and George 13 Jackie Esmonde ) Family Group 14 15 Anthony Ross ) Residents of 16 Kevin Scullion ) Aazhoodena 17 (Army Camp) 18 19 William Henderson ) Kettle Point & Stony 20 Jonathon George ) Point First Nation 21 22 Walter Myrka ) Government of Ontario 23 Kim Twohig ) (np) 24 Sue Freeborn ) 25

3

1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 3 Janet Clermont ) Municipality of 4 David Nash ) Lambton Shores 5 6 Peter Downard ) The Honourable Michael 7 Bill Hourigan ) (Np) Harris 8 Jennifer McAleer ) 9 10 Nancy Spies ) (Np) Robert Runciman 11 Alice Mrozek ) (Np) 12 13 Harvey Stosberg ) (Np) Charles Narnick 14 Jacqueline Horvat ) 15 16 Douglas Sulman, Q.C. ) Marcel Beaubien 17 Trevor Hinnegan ) (Np) 18 19 Mark Sandler ) Ontario Provincial 20 Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) (np) Police 21 22 Ian Roland ) Ontario Provincial 23 Karen Jones ) Police Association & 24 K. Deane 25

4

1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 3 Julian Falconer ) (np) Aboriginal Legal 4 Brian Eyolfson ) Services of Toronto 5 Julian Roy ) 6 7 Al J.C. O'Marra ) Office of the Chief 8 Coroner 9 10 William Horton ) Chiefs of Ontario 11 Matthew Horner ) (Np) 12 Kathleen Lickers ) (Np) 13 14 Mark Frederick ) (np) Christopher Hodgson 15 Craig Mills ) 16 17 David Roebuck ) (Np) Debbie Hutton 18 Anna Perschy ) (Np) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

5

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 6 4 5 JOAN MARGARET HOLMES, Sworn 6 7 (VOIR DIRE COMMENCED) 8 Examination-in-Chief by Ms. Susan Vella 12 9 (VOIR DIRE CONCLUDED) 10 11 Examination-in-Chief by Ms. Susan Vella 24 12 13 14 Certificate of Transcript 183 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

6

1 LIST OF EXHIBITS 2 EXHIBIT NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. 3 P-7 Expert Brief, consisting of 4 Report by Joan Holmes, 5 appendices, Power Point 6 presentation slides 7 and curriculum vitae 8 of Joan Holmes. 25 9 P-8 Book of Documents. 26 10 P-9 CD-Rom Containing PowerPoint 11 Presentation. 27 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

7

1 --- Upon commencing at 10:30 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session, the Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Once again, 7 good morning to everyone. I don't intend to make an 8 opening statement after every adjournment, but it's been 9 a month since we last convened, and these are still very 10 early days for this Inquiry. So, I think it's 11 appropriate for me to say just a few words before we 12 begin. 13 The three (3) Hearing days this week are 14 dedicated to continuing, and hopefully concluding, the 15 overview of historical facts and events affecting the 16 Aboriginal people and land in this region. 17 Our objective is to provide some 18 historical context to assist in our understanding of the 19 events that occurred in September 1995. 20 A great deal of time has passed since 21 those events, and many people's lives have been 22 affected. One only needs to look around the room at the 23 seventeen (17) diverse parties who have been granted 24 standing at this Hearing, and the others who have been 25 granted standing for Part II, to appreciate the range

8

1 and scope of interests affected. 2 Many are relying on the outcome of this 3 investigation. Among our objectives for this Inquiry is 4 to provide closure and a foundation for healing, and 5 improved relations for those affected. Long after this 6 Inquiry has completed its work, many of the parties 7 whose interests are represented here will need to 8 continue to live and work together. 9 As I stated at the opening of our Hearing 10 on standing in April, unlike a trial, a Public Inquiry 11 is expected to go beneath the surface of the controversy 12 that gave rise to its need, and to consider the broader 13 context in which the events occurred. 14 I was encouraged by the response to 15 Professor Darlene Johnston's testimony in July. There's 16 no doubt that Professor Johnston's evidence will 17 contribute to the Commission's efforts to provide 18 context, to broaden understanding, and to raise 19 awareness of the Aboriginal history of the Ipperwash 20 area. 21 Today the Commission will be calling 22 Professor Joan Holmes, whose testimony is expected to 23 build on the historical overview commenced by Professor 24 Johnston. 25 Professor Johnston focussed on the period

9

1 before Aboriginal contact with the Europeans, and 2 examined some of the more important Treaties and events 3 after contact and up to the 19th Century. 4 There may be some overlap, but Professor 5 Holmes' testimony is expected to add further historical 6 texture, and will continue right up to the period of 7 time in question. 8 When the evidentiary hearings continue on 9 a more regular pattern in September, there may be other 10 junctures at which context or background may be useful. 11 As everyone knows, a great deal of work is being 12 undertaken by the Commission, much of it with the 13 assistance of parties, and that work is progressing 14 concurrently with these evidentiary Hearings. 15 The complete record, that is the evidence 16 of these Hearings, together with the background policy 17 work that is being done in Part II, will be used to 18 write the final report and make recommendations to the 19 Government. 20 The Osgoode Symposium that took place in 21 June is a good example. The papers presented at that 22 Symposium are now on our website, and I expect that they 23 will become a valuable resource as we proceed. 24 Professor Johnston's paper is also on the 25 website and Professor Holme's will be posted as well.

10

1 I now call on Mr. Derry Millar. 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you, 3 Commissioner, good morning. 4 Before we start today, I would like to 5 attend to some housekeeping details. First we will be 6 sitting today until 5:30, we will break for lunch at 7 1:00 p.m., until 2:15 p.m. Wednesday and Thursday we 8 will start at 10:00 a.m. and sit to 4:30, and we will 9 have the same lunch break. 10 And secondly, we've created a sign-in 11 sheet and -- that's going to be at the reporter's spot 12 at her table, and we would ask every day that people 13 check off or initial that they're here. It's been done 14 -- I think I've gotten everybody today that's here thus 15 far, but if nothing changes from day to day, we can 16 simply leave it. But we want to make sure, for the 17 transcript, that we capture who's here for a party. 18 Thirdly, we've had requests for 19 additional seating at the counsel table, and we've added 20 some spots. We've determined that we can add some space 21 to this configuration, which would permit additional 22 counsel. We may have counsel who, on a particular day, 23 may or may not attend, which will again free up some 24 space. 25 But I would like anyone who seriously

11

1 believes that they need space for a second counsel to 2 let me know, and depending on the number of requests, we 3 will attempt to accommodate the requests for the 4 September Hearings. We're not going to be able to do it 5 this week, and it may necessitate moving to a different 6 row, but we'll try -- try our best to do that. 7 And for today, if people, as people are, 8 if they want to add an extra chair, that's fine. But we 9 will in the in the future try to see if we can get some 10 more space. 11 A reminder to everyone that the 12 transcripts are available on our website, which is 13 www.ipperwashenquiry.ca and as you said, Commissioner, 14 we're going to be hearing from Joan Holmes this week and 15 Ms. Vella is going to be leading Ms. Holmes. 16 I may have mis-spoke myself, we're ending 17 at 5:00 today not 5:30. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 19 morning. 20 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Good morning, Mr. 21 Commissioner. The Commission calls Joan Holmes to the 22 stand, please. 23 REGISTRAR: Would you state your name in 24 full, please for the record? 25 MS. JOAN HOLMES: Joan Margaret Holmes.

12

1 JOAN MARGARET HOLMES; Sworn 2 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Commissioner, you 4 should have before you the expert brief of Joan Holmes 5 which consists of the reports, the glossary of terms, 6 the description of Chiefs names and totems, text of 7 Surrender 29, selected population status statistics. At 8 Tab 2, a hard copy of Ms. Holmes' PowerPoint 9 presentation. Tab 3, copy of the curriculum vitae. 10 In addition, you should have before you 11 Ms. Holmes' document brief containing a hundred and 12 thirty (130) documents and an index which is a certain 13 selection of documents which may be referred to. The 14 selection is drawn from the larger grouping of 15 historical documents disclosed to all counsel in Volume 16 8 of the CD rom and for information of counsel, I will 17 refer to the Inquiry document number so that you can 18 obtain that document on your computer screens. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Everything 20 is in order. 21 22 (VOIR DIRE COMMENCED) 23 24 EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 25 Q: Thank you. Ms. Holmes, I understand

13

1 that you graduated with an Honours Bachelor of Arts and 2 Anthropology from the University of Winnipeg in 1981? 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: And what does the study of 5 anthropology involve? 6 A: The study of anthropology involves 7 the -- it's broken down into several areas. Cultural 8 anthropology studies the culture of human societies and 9 normally concentrated on what we call small scale 10 societies as opposed to large industrial society. 11 It also looks at physical anthropology 12 which is the -- the study of the human skeleton and our 13 -- our primate ancestors. And archaeology is also 14 considered part of -- of anthropology and linguistics 15 and the area that I really worked in was in cultural 16 anthropology. 17 Q: Thank you. I understand you 18 graduated with a Masters of Arts in Northern and Native 19 issues from the Institute of Canadian Studies from 20 Carlton University? 21 A: Yes, that's correct. 22 Q: And did you write a thesis for that? 23 A: Yes, I did. 24 Q: What did your thesis address in 25 brief?

14

1 A: My thesis was about the erosion of 2 Indian land rights in northern Ontario and I looked 3 specifically at northwestern Ontario which is part of 4 Treaty Number 9. And what I was -- what I was examining 5 was in Treaty Number 9 which was made between the 6 Nishnawbe and the Crown in 1905 with an adhesion in 7 1929. In -- in that area the people ceded their land 8 but they retained rights to use land that hadn't already 9 been taken up for settlement so they weren't used for 10 other purposes. 11 And the -- the land use planning process 12 that went on in the -- the early 1980s, which is when I 13 was working on my thesis, that land use planning was in 14 fact putting in regulations and laws that was going to 15 affect the way in which those Treaty 9 people could 16 continue to use that land. So, I looked at that -- 17 that's -- that's basically what I was looking at there. 18 Q: Thank you. I understand you are 19 currently the president of Joan Holmes and Associates 20 Incorporated, in Ottawa? 21 A: I am. 22 Q: And what is your company's primary 23 focus? 24 A: We do work on historical studies in 25 -- in relation to land claims and aboriginal rights.

15

1 Most of our work is historical, looking at the 2 relationship between the Crown and various First 3 Nations. 4 Q: Okay. And how long, approximately, 5 have you been engaged in this business? 6 A: Professionally, twenty-one (21) 7 years. 8 Q: Thank you. I understand that in the 9 course of your position with Joan Holmes and Associates, 10 you have acted on behalf of First Nation's governments, 11 and under joint retainers on behalf of First Nations and 12 Government; is that correct? 13 A: Yes, that is. 14 Q: Have you been qualified as an expert 15 witness before the Court before? 16 A: Yes, I have, in -- in a number of -- 17 of different cases, the -- the first one (1) where I was 18 an expert witness was I think around 1992 -- '96, sorry. 19 And I was -- I was an expert witness in a -- in the case 20 that was called Grand Chief Mike Mitchell v. The 21 Minister of National Revenue, it was in the Federal 22 Court, and I testified for Mike Mitchell, who was the 23 Grand Chief of Akwesasne. 24 And the second -- the second one (1) that 25 I did was in a case Chief Victor Buffalo and the Sampson

16

1 Cree v. Her Majesty the Queen; that also was in the 2 Federal Court of Canada, and that case is -- is still 3 ongoing. I testified in the year 2000, and I testified 4 for the Sampson Cree in that case. 5 I testified in -- in an Ontario case 6 called R v. Joseph Johnson. It was a fishing charge 7 brought by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 8 and the case was in the year 2000, and in that case I 9 testified for Joe Johnson, who was a -- a non-status 10 Mississauga man living around the Kawartha Lakes area. 11 And most recently in 2002, I testified in the case of R 12 v. Houle, which is a fishing case in the Treaty 6 area. 13 And in that case I testified for Alberta. 14 Q: Thank you. Have you written and 15 published papers during the course of your career? 16 A: Some, yes. 17 Q: And are they listed on pages 3 and 18 4, of your curriculum vitae, which is found at Tab 2? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Sorry, Tab 3 of the Expert Brief. I 21 see that you wrote a paper entitled, The Original 22 Intentions of the Indian Act, in -- for Ottawa, in April 23 of 2002, for the Pacific Business and Law Institute. 24 Can you just tell us a little bit about what that paper 25 addressed?

17

1 A: Yeah, I was -- I was asked to 2 prepare that paper for the conference. It was a 3 conference called Beyond the Indian Act. And what I did 4 in that case was I looked at the -- the historical 5 precursors of the Indian Act. Like legis -- legislation 6 that came prior to the initial Indian Act in 1876, and I 7 looked at some of that legislation, the way it was 8 encompassed into the Indian Act, and how the Indian Act 9 evolved after that. 10 What I was specifically looking at was 11 not so much the -- the legal aspects of the Indian Act, 12 but the way that the policies and the practices around 13 Indian -- the management of Indian Affairs and the 14 control of Indian Affairs by the Department of Indian 15 Affairs. 16 I was looking at how those policies and 17 practices evolved. The -- the social and political 18 forces that affected the development of -- of Indian Act 19 legislation, and sort of looking at the -- the 20 consistency of the Act and the fact that in over a 21 hundred (100) years of -- of Indian legislation in 22 Canada, that really very little of substance has 23 changed. 24 Q: And I also see that you wrote a 25 paper entitled, Research Issues and Techniques for the

18

1 St. Lawrence Seaway Project, in 1994. 2 Can you tell us what that was about? 3 A: Yeah, I was -- I was working with a 4 group of -- of young researches from Akwesasne, which is 5 a First Nation on the St. Lawrence Seaway. And I worked 6 with them to help them develop a methodological approach 7 and a research strategy for researching issues around 8 the -- the development of the St. Lawrence Seaway. And 9 when the St. Lawrence Seaway was constructed, it -- it 10 affected their community, because some -- some of their 11 land was taken because it was flooded because of the 12 Seaway. 13 So, I helped that -- I worked with that 14 community to develop a -- a solid research methodology 15 and -- and approach to doing that study. 16 Q: Right. You also -- well, we talked 17 about your thesis, the Erosion of Indian Property 18 Rights, 1983, I think you addressed that. 19 And the last paper I want to review with 20 you is The Issues and Techniques Regarding the Sale and 21 Surrender of Reserve Lands, written in 1992? 22 A: Yeah, that -- that was a paper that 23 I was asked to prepare for the National Research 24 Directors' Conference. And the National Research 25 Directors' Conference is a -- is a conference that's

19

1 held every year, and it's Research Directors from First 2 Nations across Canada and people who are doing research 3 for mainly for specific claims purposes for the Crown. 4 They get together -- together every year, they have a 5 research conference, which looks at developments in that 6 area, and people share their research. 7 So, the -- the paper that I was asked to 8 do for -- and to lead a workshop on, had to do with -- 9 again, with research methodology for -- for researching 10 land sales and -- and surrenders of -- of reserve land, 11 and we looked at the -- the issues that were involved, 12 the kinds of things one has to do in order to put 13 together a -- a research package to submit a claim on -- 14 on one (1) of those issues. 15 Q: Thank you. You've also conducted 16 several research -- historical research studies with 17 respect to First Nations on claims. Are they listed at 18 page 4 to five (5) of your curriculum vitae? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Thank you. And the first one (1) is 21 the -- on the Ojibway of Lake Superior and Heron and the 22 Bruce Peninsula. Can you just briefly describe what 23 that entailed? 24 A: Okay, that -- that paragraph, it 25 describes a number of projects that -- that I was

20

1 involved with, looking at the -- the history of -- of 2 those communities, which are all Anishinabek or -- or 3 Ojibway communities around Lake Superior, Heron, the 4 Bruce Peninsula and Manitoulin Island. 5 And the various projects I did in that 6 area looked at issues such as the relationship that 7 those communities had with the British Crown, before 8 they entered into treaty with them, the kinds of treaty 9 negotiations that they had, what was entailed in the 10 treaty negotiations, and the -- the various approaches 11 that -- that both the First Nation's side and the 12 Crown's side took to those treaty negotiations. 13 I looked at the way in which the reserves 14 in that area were set aside as a result of those 15 Treaties, and again, looking at the process that was 16 used to set aside the reserves, where the reserves were 17 set aside and then went on to look at, for a number of 18 those communities, some surrenders of -- of the reserved 19 land and -- and the sale of lands. 20 I did a lot of work on the surrender and 21 sale of lands on the Bruce Peninsula, for example, and - 22 - and around Lake Huron and -- and also on Manitoulin 23 Island. Some of those projects also involved things 24 such as looking at fishing -- fishing issues or other 25 resource use issues in that -- in that area.

21

1 Specifically, around Manitoulin Island. 2 So, that through -- and that's many, many projects that 3 I -- that I worked on in that area and through those 4 projects I have gained a pretty solid understanding of 5 the history and the relationship with the Crown in that 6 area. 7 Q: All right. Thank you. And on page 8 5 you list other issue focussed research studies; are 9 they all listed on pages 5 to 6? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: And you have a number of these. I'd 12 ask you to speak to the first one, The Nature of Pre and 13 Post Confederation Treaties and Adhesions to Treaty; 14 could you just tell us what that involved? 15 A: Okay, that was a very large -- a 16 very large study that we did in my office and I had a 17 primary role in that. And what we were looking at was 18 what -- the nature of treaties that were made between 19 various First Nations in Ont -- what's now Ontario and 20 the Crown and we looked at treaties that were made prior 21 to Confederation, treaties that were made after 22 Confederation; that's 1867 and adhesions to those 23 treaties. 24 So, we did one project on that that looks 25 specifically at what the Crown believed it had to do in

22

1 order to make a legitimate treaty. I also looked at 2 those same kinds of issues for the pre-Confederation 3 period in Ontario and the Prairie Provinces. 4 Again, looking at, basically, what the 5 process was for making a treaty and how that was done 6 under the British and how it continued under the -- 7 after Confederation under -- under Canadian 8 jurisdiction. 9 And in those -- in those -- doing those 10 studies, we looked at both the Crown's approach or the 11 Crown's perspective to treaty making and also the -- the 12 First Nations' perspective and attitude to the treaty 13 and their -- their belief in what -- what was involved 14 in making a treaty and how those treaties affected their 15 rights, what kinds of rights they had as a result of 16 treaty. 17 Q: Thank you. And you've also been 18 involved conducting several studies relating to the 19 administrative practice of creating Indian Bands within 20 the meaning of the Indian Act; is that correct 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And, as well, you've conducted 23 studies into the loss of reserve lands through surrender 24 and expropriation; is that correct? 25 A: That's correct.

23

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 2 Commissioner, I would like, at this time, to tender Joan 3 Holmes as an expert in aboriginal rights, on government 4 aboriginal relations and aboriginal ethno-history? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Does 6 anybody have any objection or anybody have any 7 questions? 8 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Good morning, 9 Commissioner. I'm W. Myrka on behalf of the Province of 10 Ontario. The Province does not object to the testimony 11 of this witness or the admissibility of her report for 12 the purposes of this Inquiry. 13 Nor do we object to her characterization 14 as an expert witness on the understanding that the 15 purpose of this evidence, as it was for Dr. Johnstone 16 was to provide a historical overview and history of 17 Aboriginal peoples in southwestern Ontario, in order to 18 inform the issues that will be dealt with in this 19 Inquiry. 20 The Province is compelled, nevertheless, 21 to point out that the report and some of the evidence 22 that may be heard, may rely on facts and opinions that 23 are currently contentious in various pieces of 24 litigation in this -- in Ontario, some of which involves 25 the Province, and some of which does not.

24

1 And we anticipate it may be contentious 2 in future litigation as well. We appreciate that the 3 issues are different in the litigation and for the 4 purposes of the Inquiry, but we -- we do need to put on 5 the record that Ontario does wish to reserve its right 6 to possibly challenge the expertise of this witness, and 7 her evidence, in that other litigation, and not for the 8 purposes of this Inquiry, thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 10 very much, Mr. Myrka. 11 Subject to that qualification, I think 12 Professor Holmes is characterized as an expert witness 13 and entitled to give expert opinion evidence. Thank 14 you. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you, 16 Commissioner. 17 18 (VOIR DIRE CONCLUDED) 19 20 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 21 Q: Ms. Holmes, were you retained by the 22 Ipperwash Commission of Inquiry to conduct historical 23 research? 24 A: I was. 25 Q: Did you write a report which

25

1 contains your findings, opinions and conclusions? 2 A: Yes, I did. 3 Q: And is your report and schedule 4 shown at Tab 1 and Tab A to D, of the Expert Brief? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: And did you also prepare a 7 PowerPoint presentation, as an aid to your testimony? 8 A: I did. 9 Q: And is a hard copy of your slides 10 contained at Tab 2 of the Expert Brief? 11 A: It is. 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Commissioner, at this 13 time I would like to tender Ms. Holme's Expert Brief, 14 consisting of her report, appendices, PowerPoint 15 presentation, slides and curriculum vitae, as Exhibit P- 16 7. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It will be 18 so marked. 19 20 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-7: Expert Brief, consisting of Report 21 by Joan Holmes, appendices, Power 22 Point presentation slides and 23 curriculum vitae of Joan Holmes. 24 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you.

26

1 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 2 Q: And, Ms. Holmes, you prepared a 3 selection of documents, which you may refer to during 4 the course of your evidence, in a book entitled, Book of 5 Documents? 6 A: I did. 7 Q: And that is from the selection of 8 the historical documents contained on CD-Rom Volume 8? 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: All right. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Commissioner, I'd like 12 to tender the Book of Documents as the next exhibit, 13 Exhibit P-8. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 15 very much. 16 17 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-8: Book of Documents. 18 19 MS. SUSAN VELLA: And lastly, 20 Commissioner, I'd like to tender the CD-Rom of the 21 PowerPoint presentation as the next exhibit, Exhibit P- 22 9. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-9. 24 25 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-9: CD-Rom Containing PowerPoint

27

1 Presentation. 2 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. And, 4 Commissioner, You'll recall that Volume 8 has already 5 been tendered as an exhibit, Exhibit P-4. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 8 Q: Ms. Holmes, can you tell us what the 9 scope of your assignment was? 10 A: Yes, I was -- I was hired by the 11 Commission to prepare a background history of the Kettle 12 and Stony Point area, I was looking at the -- to give a 13 little bit of background on the -- the pre-history of -- 14 of the area, the pre-Treaty period, and to look at the - 15 - the major events that happened in the last couple of 16 hundred years in this area. 17 I looked at the negotiation of -- of the 18 Treaty, which was -- which was concluded in 1827, to 19 look at the way in which the reserves at Stony Point and 20 Kettle Point were established under that Treaty, in 21 general, how those -- the -- the Band in that area and 22 the -- the Band that had been created by Government, 23 under the Treaty, how that was administered and its 24 relationship with -- with the Crown. 25 I also looked at the way -- how those two

28

1 (2) reserves had been diminished in size, the -- 2 surrender of -- of parts of the reserve, the taking of 3 the remainder of the Stony Point Reserve by the 4 Department of National Defense in -- during the Second 5 World War, to look in general at the -- the grievances 6 around burial grounds and government's response to those 7 grievances. 8 And then very briefly to bring the study 9 up to date to the -- to the present day. I was also to 10 -- to look at -- to prepare an executive summary and -- 11 and prepare for a presentation. 12 Q: And can you describe what steps you 13 took in with relation to your research methodology? 14 A: Yes. When -- when we began the -- 15 the work the first thing that we did was we looked at 16 some secondary sources and some existing research so 17 that's both published works and -- and other studies 18 that had been done in the area and those things are 19 listed in the bibliography. 20 Moving on from that, we identified a 21 number of archival sources, that's written documentation 22 that's kept in records. We identified those -- those 23 sources and examined them looking for documentation that 24 would help to -- help us to put together a background 25 overview history. We -- we collected those documents

29

1 and all of -- of all of the documentation we collected, 2 we -- we selected the documents that in -- in our 3 experience felt that were the -- were the most important 4 and authoritative documents that -- that demonstrated 5 the history. 6 Those documents we -- are in an index 7 which is the -- the large index that you described 8 which, I can't remember the exhibit number, but it's -- 9 I think that there's about three hundred and fifty (350) 10 documents in that collection. We put those together in 11 an index as a guide, as an organizational guide. 12 Also the index provides what's very 13 important to historians and probably of no interest to 14 anyone else, is the source information. What we call 15 the -- the reference or the source citation which 16 explains where the documents came from in order that a 17 person can go back and look -- find those documents, 18 verify that in fact that they are legitimate historical 19 documents and to know what kind of a collection they 20 came from. 21 Because the -- the providence or the -- 22 the collection that a document comes from tells you 23 something about that document. So, we need that 24 information. So, that -- that material was put 25 together. We use that as the basis for writing the

30

1 reports. So, when I'm writing a report I'm constantly 2 referring to those documents and the documents are 3 footnoted in -- in the reports so as you read the report 4 you can tell where the factual information comes from. 5 We also looked at newspapers and -- and 6 other -- other media for -- for providing a general flow 7 of history of what happened in the more modern period. 8 Q: All right. And so you -- what 9 archives did you actually review; what source of 10 archives? 11 A: Most of the written material comes 12 from collections of documents from Department of Indian 13 Affairs' files and those documents are found in a number 14 of places. The older ones, generally speaking, are 15 housed at the National Archives of Canada in -- in a 16 record group that is for Indian Affairs. 17 They -- and some of the documents are 18 from -- are still within the Department's Central 19 Registry, either at their headquarters in Ottawa -- or 20 in Hull, excuse me, or in their regional office in 21 Toronto. And many of the documents we accessed through 22 the Department of Indian Affairs Central Registry where 23 they store all their more -- more current documents. 24 So, that's generally documents that are from, maybe, 25 say, the 1950s, '60s, '70s would be still with the

31

1 Department. 2 Besides that there's a fair number of 3 documents that come from collections that are at the 4 National Archives of Canada which are colonial records. 5 So, those are records that were kept by the British 6 Colonial Office and many years ago the National Archives 7 of Canada went to Britain and got copies of those 8 documents as they pertain to Canada and their part of 9 our -- our national history. 10 Q: Thank you. Now, before we go into 11 the substance of your testimony, there are certain terms 12 that you use frequently within your report and I thought 13 it would be helpful at the outset to define some of 14 those terms. 15 The first series of terms used in the 16 report are "surrender", "cessation" and "purchase" as 17 used in relation to aboriginal lands. 18 A: Hmm hmm. Okay. You'll find when 19 you look at either historical records or writing about 20 aboriginal affairs and aboriginal history and in legal 21 documents pertaining to aboriginal history, you see 22 those terms used a great deal. 23 And, in general, they're used quite 24 interchangeably. The sense of the word "to cede land" 25 or -- or "land cession" or "land cession treaty", or a

32

1 "land purchase" or "reserves surrender" or "a purchase" 2 all of those terms are terms that are used to describe 3 an action by which -- or a transaction by which a First 4 Nation or a group of aboriginal people has given over 5 certain rights in their traditional lands or in reserve 6 lands over to the Crown. 7 And in the -- in the modern day, today, 8 people who are working in this field, they often use the 9 term a "land cession treaty" or a "land cession" to 10 refer to that initial transaction under which a First 11 Nation gave over some particular rights in their land to 12 the Crown and they used the term "surrender" more to -- 13 specifically to refer to a transaction under which a 14 First Nation or a group of First Nations gave over 15 rights in reserve land to the Crown. 16 And maybe it would be a good idea for me 17 to -- to just point out the difference between a reserve 18 land and traditional land. 19 Q: Please? 20 A: If I'm not going too far up here. 21 What you have to recall, the general principle that -- 22 that's always been recognized in -- in Canada or in the 23 land that was -- became Canada was that the aboriginal 24 people had -- had the right -- had the title to the 25 land. And that is their traditional land. So, thus we

33

1 talk about traditional land to which the -- the 2 aboriginal people have been occupying, using and owning. 3 And when we talk about -- 4 Q: I'm sorry, so that would be pre- 5 contact, for example? 6 A: Yes. But it could -- it could also 7 be right up to the modern period. We have in Canada 8 still areas where the aboriginal title has never been 9 formally ceded. 10 Q: Thank you. 11 A: Okay? So, that's traditional -- 12 traditional land that people have never formally given 13 over to the Crown through a treaty process. 14 So, what we often do today is we talk 15 about when that land is given to the Crown that's a land 16 cession treaty or ceding the land to the Crown. 17 There's also reserve land. And reserve 18 land is land that the Crown has specifically set aside 19 or established for the exclusive use and occupation of a 20 particular group of Aboriginal people. 21 So, a reserve -- a reserve is different 22 than traditional land. A reserve is -- is land that has 23 a particular legal status in -- in the -- in the 24 Canadian system. And not to complicate things too much, 25 but a reserve land can -- reserve land can either be

34

1 land that was excepted out of a Treaty so, if a Treaty 2 gave up most of the land, but this one (1) little 3 section was -- was retained for the -- the exclusive use 4 and occupation or a reserve can be created on land that 5 was already ceded. So, in that case a land cession 6 treaty gave up rights in the land to the Crown, and then 7 the Crown came and created a reserve on top of that 8 land, and that could also be a reserve. 9 So, what -- getting back to your original 10 question about what a surrender is, or a cession, in -- 11 in modern times, people usually talk about a surrender 12 from a reserve land, where a piece of -- of reserve land 13 has -- the rights to it have been given up to the Crown, 14 and it's -- a surrender can be different things that you 15 can give over completely, the use of land to be sold to 16 somebody else -- 17 Q: Hmm hmm. 18 A: -- or a surrender can also be just 19 to surrender something like particular resources. So, 20 you -- so a First Nation, for example, could surrender 21 their timber for sale. It doesn't mean that they have 22 surrendered the land itself. They are just surrendering 23 the right for somebody else to come and -- and take the 24 timber. 25 In getting back again to the original

35

1 question of the use of those terms, you'll see for 2 example in the historic period in -- in the past, in the 3 distant past, those terms are used fairly 4 interchangeably as well. 5 So, for example, in the Royal 6 Proclamation of 1763, they talk -- that document talks 7 about the -- the Indian Nations or the Indian Tribes, 8 ceding their land to the Crown. 9 And -- but when we look at something like 10 many of the surrenders from that early period, say from 11 the early 1800s, as we'll see with the Huron Tract 12 Treaty, in the Treaty itself, they talk about the land 13 being surrendered and sold. 14 So, you can see that in the -- in the 15 historical documents as well, that those terms are used 16 very, very interchangeably, and sometimes they just use 17 the term "purchase," as to sell or to purchase land. 18 Q: All right. So, what you're saying 19 is that some of these terms are very time period 20 specific, and that would have informed the way and when 21 you used these terms within your report? 22 A: Yes. Generally speaking in the 23 report, we try to use the same terms that are used in 24 the historical documents, which can become very 25 confusing, because also in the historical documents,

36

1 even though there's some time sensitivity to how -- the 2 way in which people use terms, they also use terms in a 3 very -- various ways. 4 So, sometimes they'll use one (1) term, 5 sometimes they'll use another term, and it can be a 6 little bit confusing. 7 But in -- but generally speaking, those 8 terms mean the same. In the -- and -- and always I'm 9 speaking not in a -- in a legal sense, but in a 10 historical sense, or a sense of common usage of terms. 11 Q: Thank you, yes. And as well in your 12 report you refer to an entity called a Band in different 13 context. Can you give us a sense of the different 14 connotations of Band, that you use? 15 A: Okay. Yeah. The term "Band" has 16 been a very problematic term in -- in the study of -- of 17 Aboriginal history. Band can have many different 18 meanings. And again, the people who use the term Band 19 in historical documents, are very often using it in both 20 a -- a general colloquial kind of sense, and -- and 21 sometimes they're using it in a much more specific 22 legalistic sense, or -- or a sense that's defined in 23 legislation. 24 So, Band can mean a group. So, you -- in 25 -- in historical documentation, in anthropological

37

1 writings, in historical writings you'll -- you will read 2 people referring to a hunting band, i.e., a group of 3 people who are related with each other and carry out an 4 activity together. They hunt together. They live 5 together. They are usually some kind of an extended 6 family. 7 So, we see Band used in that sense. 8 There's also a very particular use of the term "Band" 9 and that's the use as it was defined in the Indian Act. 10 And I believe, if my memory serves me correctly, I 11 believe that the first time that Band is ever defined in 12 -- in the legal sense is in the -- the 1876 Indian Act 13 which was the first, sort of, consolidated Indian Act 14 legislation passed by the Canadian Government. 15 And in that case the Department of Indian 16 Affairs had a definition of Band which is quite 17 legalistic which they -- which they -- they use in their 18 management and administration. And that -- that 19 definition is -- it's tied to two (2) things. 20 The, roughly speaking, the definition 21 goes something like this, it's a group of Indians, and 22 "Indian" again having a particular legal meaning, it's a 23 group of Indians who have an interest in land that has 24 been set aside for their use, i.e., that have interests 25 -- a common interest in a -- in a reserve or have a

38

1 common interest in a trust fund in a -- in a -- a trust 2 fund is a fund of money that's -- that's owned by a 3 First Nation which the Government, through the 4 Department of Indian Affairs manages for them. 5 So, that's, kind of a very legalistic 6 explanation of Band and you'll see that used. In the 7 report, again, we try to reflect the way that the term 8 is used in the documents to reflect the documents. 9 And it's used very generally, very coll - 10 - in a very colloquial sense. Department officials, 11 Missionaries, First Nations themselves, they use that 12 term, generally, to describe a group of people who they 13 associate with each other. 14 Q: All right. Thank you. And I also 15 note that throughout your report you refer to a 16 particular grouping of aboriginal persons variously as 17 Aux Sable, Kettle Point, Stony Point and Kettle and 18 Stony Point. On what basis did you choose which 19 designation to be used within the particular context in 20 your report? 21 A: Again, we tried to reflect what was 22 being said in the document and how the document 23 described the people. Sometimes, it's very difficult 24 when you're reading a document to figure out exactly who 25 they meant.

39

1 Sometimes the term Aux Sable was used and 2 when you read the document you get a clear sense that 3 they're really referring to all the people that are 4 residing around what's now Kettle and Stony Point. 5 They refer to them as the Aux Sable 6 Indians or Sable or Sable or various confusing 7 spellings. Sometimes, in a -- in a document, 8 particularly in the petitions that come out of the 9 communities, you'll see the people describe themselves, 10 what is obviously a more precise definition for how they 11 identify themselves. 12 They'll say, all the old and young men 13 from Kettle Point or the people from Aux Sable or Stony 14 Point or all the men or the leading men from Kettle and 15 -- and Stony Point. 16 So, what we've tried to do in the -- in 17 the report itself, and I'm sure that I wasn't perfect at 18 it, was to -- to use whatever term they were using in 19 the documents that we have used to -- to extract the 20 facts from. 21 Q: Thank you. 22 A: Actually, the Department of Indian 23 Affairs officials from the very beginning to -- up until 24 the more recent era have been the most, sort of various 25 in their use of that. And -- and very often what I

40

1 found in the documents was they would refer to Kettle 2 Point especially in the earlier period. 3 They would refer to Aux Sable or Kettle 4 Point when they were really meaning both -- both areas; 5 the full body of people that -- that lived in that area. 6 So, it -- it is a little bit confusing. 7 Q: Okay, thank you. And as well you 8 use the term "chief" in various ways in your report. 9 Can you give us the -- the two (2) senses in which you 10 use the term "chief". 11 A: Okay. Again, the term "chief" is 12 rather like the term "band". Chief is a -- well of 13 first of all it's an English word so it is not -- it is 14 probably not very accurate in -- in capturing how people 15 actually named, recognized and characterized their 16 leadership. So that's always a caveat when dealing with 17 any of these English terms. 18 It's used in a couple of ways. First of 19 all like the word band, chief has a particular meaning 20 under Indian Act Legislation, normally being that 21 Department of Indian Affairs in the historical period 22 recognized a chief as somebody who was elected using a 23 particular electoral system. 24 Q: Is this an electoral -- election 25 system, excuse me, that was dictated by the Department

41

1 or by some other means? 2 A: It was -- it's -- it's specified in 3 Indian Act Legislation the -- it's called the electoral 4 system under -- and it was introduced and in -- in some 5 cases imposed by the Indian Department on Indian 6 communities starting around the 1880's. Traditionally, 7 chief is a -- a translation or an English 8 characterization of a leading person in a band. 9 The -- there are traditional chiefs. 10 There was always a leadership in an -- in the 11 Anishinabek language I believe it's Ogima. And the 12 chief would be the leader of the people. A chief 13 traditionally was a person who gained the respect of the 14 people therefore people followed him. 15 Sometimes you see a hereditary aspect to 16 chief because the -- one of the sons of a -- of a chief 17 would be a particularly strong person worthy of 18 following and therefore would become chief after his 19 father. But it was not necessarily hereditary. 20 When the British first started having 21 interaction with the First Nations and -- and the French 22 before them, but I'm just going to talk about the 23 British period, when the British first started having 24 interaction with the -- with the First Nation peoples, 25 they -- they dealt with their chiefs and you'll see in -

42

1 - in many transactions, the British will ask them to put 2 forward their chiefs of a head man to -- to negotiate 3 with and to deal with. 4 As time went on the Department of Indian 5 Affairs officials or the Indian -- Indian Department 6 officials influenced chiefdoms because they would, by 7 their distribution of presents, by choosing to negotiate 8 with particular people who were probably easier to 9 negotiate with, they would give authority to someone as 10 a chief who maybe would not have had that authority 11 without their influence. 12 Q: Thank you. All right. And would 13 you also kindly define what an Order in Council is? 14 A: Yeah. An Order in Council is a -- 15 is a legal document passed by the Privy Council. They 16 are normally introduced by a department, like a 17 government department who has jurisdiction or a 18 particular jurisdiction and responsibility in an area, 19 will draft up what they want in an Order in Council. It 20 is passed by the Privy Council and to -- to give affect 21 to -- to particular transactions. 22 Q: Thank you. And a petition? You 23 refer to a petition. 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: What is that?

43

1 A: Petitions were used in the early 2 period to -- to address Government, or to address 3 Government officials. So, for instance -- 4 Q: Who -- who did the addressing? 5 A: In -- in the case of the -- the 6 material that I'm dealing with in my report, these are 7 petitions that came from -- from the Aboriginal people. 8 It was their way of making a complaint or a suggestion 9 or bringing a grievance to the attention of the 10 Government. 11 And normally those Petitions would have 12 been -- often the -- the actual writing of them would 13 have been done by a missionary, by an interpreter, by 14 somebody that the First Nation group trusted to -- to 15 write up their -- their request to Government. And 16 those Petitions normally went to -- sometimes they just 17 went to the Indian agent, but normally they would go to 18 the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, who was 19 the -- like a Minister is today, a Minister of a 20 Department. 21 Or sometimes the Aboriginal people would 22 send a Petition directly to the Lieutenant Governor, or 23 the Governor General -- 24 Q: Hmm hmm. 25 A: -- because they had lost faith in

44

1 the Indian Department Officials to follow up on their 2 grievances. So, the Petition was a way in which they -- 3 they expressed their -- their opinion and made their 4 requests. 5 Q: All right, and last. How is it that 6 you -- or at least, how do you use the term "Band 7 Council Resolution" throughout your report? 8 A: Okay. In the report we use the term 9 "Band Council Resolution" to identify a written document 10 that -- that was prepared by a Band Council at -- at a 11 Council Minute. 12 Sometimes you see them called a -- a 13 Minute of Council. So, when the Band Council was having 14 a meeting, they would come to certain decisions, they 15 would write those up, as a Band Council Resolution. And 16 you see those from around the -- the early 1870s onward. 17 Q: All right. Thank you. Now, Ms. 18 Holmes, were you present during the testimony of Dr. 19 Johnstone? 20 A: Yes, I was. 21 Q: As you know, there will be some 22 overlap in your respective presentations with respect to 23 the early period, the 18th century and 19th century. 24 Accordingly, I do not propose that we go into 25 significant detail, at least the same level of detail as

45

1 addressed in your report, however, I do wish you to 2 review those periods in sufficient detail for your 3 presentation today. 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: And I believe that you've prepared a 6 PowerPoint presentation to assist the Commission with 7 your testimony? 8 A: I have. 9 Q: Perhaps you would like to put that 10 on? 11 A: Yeah. I think somebody turned off 12 my machine. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Just bear with us and 17 we'll get this going. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 THE WITNESS: We're just going to have 22 to wait a minute while all this comes up. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

46

1 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 2 Q: Perhaps you can start by reminding 3 us when the British defeated the French over the 4 Territory that was then known as New France? 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: Okay, just -- just to refresh us, 9 I'll -- I'll just -- I'll just remind everybody of -- of 10 where we are here. Okay. If you -- if you look at on 11 the map starting with the slide -- at the bottom of the 12 slide, here's Lake Erie. We go -- 13 Q: Now, we're just pointing at the 14 bottom of the slide on number 2? 15 A: Yeah. Sorry. Up the Detroit River, 16 the St. Clair -- Lake St. Clair. Up the St. Clair River 17 to Lake Huron which is at the top left-hand side of the 18 slide, looking at the slide. 19 If you recall from Darlene Johnstone 20 talking about this period, before the British conquest, 21 all of these groups, the Ojibwe also known as Sauteau 22 and Mississauga are around this area of southeastern 23 Lake Huron and the St. Clair River. 24 You've got Ottawa down here on the St. 25 Clair River, Potawatomi generally on the Detroit side of

47

1 the Detroit River and these people have all been in 2 relationship with the French, have been trading with the 3 French. 4 When the British -- the British and the 5 French have a large conflict known as the war of -- the 6 Seven (7) Year War, in Canada they called it the French 7 Indian War -- 8 Q: Maybe if you can just wait until you 9 position that microphone for the sound to come through? 10 A: Sorry. There. The -- the British 11 beat the French and took over the -- this area and the 12 war -- the war was actually finished in 1760. But the 13 British were very, very concerned about their 14 relationship with the First Nations in this area. 15 And what you have to recall about the 16 area is that there were -- there was a very small French 17 settlement around the Detroit area other than that, very 18 little settlement. This is really aboriginal territory. 19 It was -- the French were engaged in the 20 fur trade in this area and the British basically were 21 very interested in this area to keep the French out to 22 capture the fur trade and to be in alliance with the 23 First Nations in this area. They needed them as 24 military allies. They needed their trade. 25 So, we'll see that the -- the people that

48

1 we are focusing on the -- the -- what -- what the 2 British called the Chippewa and what the French called 3 the Ojibwe or the Soto. These people are around the 4 southeast shore of Lake Huron at this time, occupying 5 that area, have been in relationship with the French and 6 they come into relationship with the British at the -- 7 at the end of the -- the Seven (7) Year War and the 8 British were very anxious to have their cooperation and 9 to have -- to have their trade. 10 So, shortly after -- 11 Q: Just -- just before you move on to 12 the next slide -- 13 A: Yeah, sorry. 14 Q: -- if you're going to, just to 15 orient all of us, can you show approximately on that map 16 where the present day Sarnia Reserve, Kettle and Stony 17 Point Reserve and the former Stony Res -- Reserve was? 18 A: Okay. Okay. The Kettle and Stony 19 Point Reserve are right in this area. 20 Q: And just describe that for the 21 record? 22 A: And this is on the southeast shore 23 of Lake Huron. If you follow Lake Huron down into the 24 St. Clair River, this -- where this large green dot is 25 here, this is the area of Sarnia.

49

1 Q: All right. And it's marked "Ojibwe, 2 Soto and Mississauga"? 3 A: That's right. And if you continue 4 down the St. Clair River into Lake St. Clair you'll see 5 right here on the northeast shore of Lake St. Clair is 6 what's known today as Walpole Island and we see in the 7 historical record called Chenail Ecarte. 8 So, this -- this is -- this is where all 9 of the people that eventually enter into the Huron Tract 10 Treaty. This is where they were living at the time of 11 the conquest when they first come into relationship with 12 the British. 13 Q: All right. And you're basically -- 14 we're just demonstrating the territory between Lake St. 15 Clair and the southeastern shore of Lake Huron? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And what is the present date sites 18 of the 1760 site of the Potawatomi? 19 A: That's Detroit. So, as I was saying, 20 the -- the British were -- were anxious about their 21 relationship with the First Nations in that -- in this 22 area and they had cause to be because the First Nations 23 were much more favourably disposed towards the French 24 than the British. 25 And even after the conquest in 1760, many

50

1 people believed that the French were going to come back. 2 So, they were -- they were reluctant to -- to enter into 3 a relationship with the British. They didn't really 4 trust them. The British had in the thirteen (13) 5 colonies had been involved with a lot of fraudulent land 6 deals; stealing land basically. 7 So -- so, the First Nations were very 8 cautious to come into a relationship with them. So, in - 9 - as a result of that, the -- the British passed a 10 proclamation in 1763 and this -- the Royal Proclamation 11 of 1763 it is a very important document in aboriginal 12 history. 13 It -- it did a number of things and the -- 14 the important things for -- for the purpose of -- of this 15 history is -- is first of all, if you -- you look on the 16 map you'll notice that -- 17 Q: Just for the record, we're looking at 18 the map on slide 3 of your PowerPoint presentation dated 19 1763. 20 A: So, the Royal Proclamation 21 established what was called the -- the Proclamation Line 22 and you will notice it on the map here. It -- it 23 separates the colonies. So, if we go along the eastern 24 colony of -- of the eastern seaboard of British North 25 America, it separates the British colonies which we think

51

1 of as the thirteen (13) colonies and Quebec which is the 2 southern part of modern day Quebec to the Ottawa River. 3 This area was recognized by the British as 4 settled area. Everything to the west of that -- the west 5 of the Proclamation Line they called Indian Country. And 6 if you notice where our communities are, this is Lake 7 Huron and Georgian Bay. Here's our communities down here 8 and it's -- and it's clear that they are within the 9 Indian Country. 10 And the significance of the Indian Country 11 is that by the Royal Proclamation, the Indian Country was 12 protected from -- from settlement. So, the -- so, the -- 13 the -- within the Indian Country according to the Royal 14 Proclamation, the people could not come and settle there 15 until that land had been formally ceded to the Crown. 16 And in here in the Royal Proclamation they 17 use the term "ceded". So the British Government was 18 protecting that -- that area -- the Indian Country from - 19 - from settlement. And according to the -- to the rules 20 of the Royal Proclamation and Professor Johnstone went 21 over this quite thoroughly so I -- I won't go into detail 22 on it. 23 It is -- it is document number 1 and it is 24 at Tab 1 in your -- in your books if you'd like to look 25 at it, but the --

52

1 A: It's Inquiry Document number 4000001. 2 Q: So, according to the -- to the Royal 3 Proclamation, the -- the land in the Indian Country could 4 only be ceded to the Crown. The Crown had to purchase it 5 before anyone could go and live there. 6 The -- the Royal Proclamation, just in 7 general, it's important in Aboriginal history because the 8 -- the policies and the practices of the British Indian 9 Department, really flow from those basic principles that 10 -- that are laid out in the Royal Proclamation and -- and 11 the most fundamental of the -- of the principles is that 12 the First Nations were to be treated with -- with honour 13 and justice. 14 The -- the British were very concerned 15 about building a relationship and keeping these people as 16 allies, because they -- they were -- the were concerned 17 with -- with holding -- with holding the Territory. 18 Q: All right. So, the map that you 19 referred to just for the record, the Royal Proclamation 20 Line to the right or east of it, in a darker pink shade, 21 is the British Colonies, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and the 22 Eastern Seaboard of Newfoundland and the Island of 23 Newfoundland. 24 And to the west of that line in lighter 25 pink shading is Indian country within which the people --

53

1 Aboriginal peoples with whom we are interested, were 2 situated, and to the west of that Territory in yellow, is 3 Louisiana; is that correct? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: All right. And is it fair to say 6 that one (1) of the significances of the King's 7 designation of this large Indian Territory or country is 8 that it recognized the ownership, if you will, of the 9 Indian inhabitants of that particular area of land? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: The -- the other thing that I would 13 just -- just point out before we move on, around this 14 period the -- the Indian -- the British Indian 15 Department has been created, and the British Indian 16 Department, it was actually created under the guidance of 17 -- of Sir William Johnson, who's a name that you always 18 hear a lot of when you're looking at early aboriginal 19 history. 20 And Johnson shared the Royal Proclamation 21 with the First Nations. So, while the Royal Proclamation 22 was proclaimed by the King and -- and issued and used as 23 a guidance to governors of -- of all these colonies that 24 we see, Quebec and -- and the British colonies, it was 25 for their guidance in how they should deal with land and

54

1 what they could and could not do. 2 It was also shared with all the Aboriginal 3 groups, and Johnson was very -- was very active in that, 4 in explaining it to the First Nations and promoting it 5 and the -- as you study aboriginal history in general, 6 what you'll see is that the aboriginal people are 7 constantly recalling the Royal Proclamation, the -- the 8 terms that are in the Royal Proclamation, and looking to 9 that for -- for their protection, and as a basis for 10 their relationship with the Crown. 11 And the -- the copy of the Royal 12 Proclamation that -- that I provided with my documents, 13 is in fact a copy that comes from William Johnson's 14 papers, and -- and he -- he accompanies that with his 15 instructions to share it with the First Nations. 16 Q: And -- 17 A: So, it's -- it's a document that is - 18 - that is well known, both amongst First Nations and -- 19 and amongst the Crown authorities. 20 Q: Was the Royal Proclamation ever 21 revoked by the Imperial Crown? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Okay. 24 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Are we at a convenient 25 place to break for the morning break, Commissioner? I

55

1 would like to request we have the morning break? 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 3 we'll break now for fifteen (15) minutes. We'll break 4 now for fifteen (15) minutes. Thank you very much. 5 THE REGISTRAR: All rise please. This 6 Inquiry will recess for fifteen (15) minutes. 7 8 --- Upon recessing at 11:45 a.m. 9 --- Upon resuming at 12:04 p.m. 10 11 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 12 resumed. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay, carry 14 on. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 18 Q: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Holmes. 19 Would you like to carry on then with the next slide? 20 A: Okay. The next -- the next thing I'm 21 going to talk about is the -- the treaty of 1827 which 22 became known as the Huron Tract Treaty. And I have four 23 (4) slides for the treaty. 24 The first slide here, the visual that you 25 see is three (3) pages of the manuscript copy of the

56

1 treaty; the handwritten copy of the treaty. The 2 handwritten copy actually takes five (5) pages but I just 3 put three (3) pages up here to show you what it looked 4 like, to give a taste of the historical document. 5 And, first of all, what I'm going to talk 6 about is a little bit about the process that the Crown 7 used in order to negotiate this treaty and then I'm going 8 to go on in the other slides and talk a little bit about 9 the actual terms of the treaty. 10 Q: And perhaps you can start by telling 11 us what events gave rise to this process? 12 A: Right. The -- after the war of 1812 13 and, if you remember, the War of 1812 was a war between 14 the Americans and the British in -- in Canada, in what 15 was called Upper Canada, at that time. 16 The -- during the War the British felt 17 that what -- what is now southwestern Ontario, this area 18 north of Lake Erie and south of Lake Huron that this area 19 was particularly vulnerable to attack by the Americans 20 and they didn't feel that the -- the -- the non- 21 aboriginal population -- the white population in that 22 area was maybe as loyal to the British as they would 23 like. 24 So, they were very anxious to -- to give - 25 - to make settlement in the area to bring settlers into -

57

1 - into what's now southwestern Ontario. 2 And so, in order to do that, if you 3 remember, under the terms of the Royal Proclamation, the 4 -- the first -- the British had to take a cession of the 5 land from the -- from the aboriginal people in order that 6 they could bring settlers in. 7 So, they -- they started a process that 8 led to this treaty and they negotiated it over a period 9 of nine (9) years. So, you can see it's not -- it wasn't 10 a -- a quick or a frivolous undertaking. It took some 11 time to negotiate it. 12 So, first of all, I'm -- I'm just going to 13 tell you a little bit about the process that they used. 14 So, initially, around 1818 the Lieutenant Governor of 15 Upper Canada who was called Maitland, he decided that he 16 wanted to have this area settled and he drew up a map 17 where he marked off a number of blocks of land that he 18 wanted to have ceded by the aboriginal people. 19 And one of these areas of land was what 20 later becomes known as the Huron Tract. At that time, 21 Maitland thought that the land was about seven hundred 22 and twelve thousand (712,000) acres. And that he -- he 23 instructed the Deputy Superintendent General of Indian 24 Affairs to set about finding out who the aboriginal 25 people were who owned that land and what it would take to

58

1 get a cession of the land. 2 So, the Superintendent General sent a 3 message to John Askin who was the Superintendent at -- 4 the Indian Superintendent at Amherstberg. He sent him a 5 copy of that map and that map, if you recall, Professor 6 Darlene Johnstone showed us that map in her discussion. 7 So he -- he contacted Askin and he said, 8 find out who owns this land and, you know, what's it 9 going to take to get a cession of the land. So, Askin, 10 who was the Superintendent and I'll just -- just divert 11 for a minute and speak a little bit about him. 12 John Askin was the son of an Indian 13 Department official, who's -- his name was also John 14 Askin and a -- and a Ottawa woman, an Ottawa woman, and 15 he -- Askin was born up around Michilimackinac. He 16 worked up there with the British Indian Department from 17 before the war of 1812. And Michilimackinac, if we look 18 on this other map, it's up here -- 19 Q: And just for the record, we're 20 looking at Exhibit P-6 which is a map of the Great Lakes 21 region. 22 A: Okay. so Michilimackinac is up in the 23 -- the straits beyond Lake Huron and so Askin grew up in 24 this area. His mother's an Ottawa so she's probably from 25 that area. He grew up here. He was involved in the war

59

1 of 1812 and later he moved down in 1816, I believe, and 2 he started working at the British fort at Amherstberg 3 which is on the -- what's now the Canadian side of the -- 4 the Detroit River. 5 So, he was around this area, so I would -- 6 I would assume from that, that Askin knew the people of 7 this area very well, because this was his region and 8 because he was an aboriginal person himself, spoke 9 Adolwal, which is a very close language to -- it's also 10 an Algonquin speaking language and -- and he probably 11 spoke the Chippewa language as well, although I'm not 12 sure of that. I'm assuming that because his mother was a 13 Adolwal. 14 So Askin -- Askin states that he -- he 15 called the people to come to Amherstberg in 1818 to talk 16 about seeding their land and the interesting thing that 17 you see from Askin is, he says that the people, the 18 Chippewa who own this land are the Chippewa from Chenail 19 Ecarte which is now called Walpole Island, the River St. 20 Clair which is the river between Lake St. Clair and Lake 21 Huron and River Aux Sable. 22 So, he identifies those people as the 23 people who own that land who the Crown should be dealing 24 with in order to take a surrender of the land. 25 He calls them to Council and they meet.

60

1 And actually, I'm going to read out to you the minutes of 2 that first Council because this is the first time that 3 the Crown consults with the people about taking the 4 surrender of the land. 5 And the minute of that Council is Document 6 Number 6 and it's found at Tab 112 in the -- the books. 7 And just -- hang on -- 8 Q: That would be Inquiry Document Number 9 4000012. And just -- just before we move on, the Great 10 Lake regions map upon which you just referred is in fact 11 Exhibit P-5. I just wanted to correct the record. Thank 12 you. 13 A: Okay. So, I'm reading from this 14 document which is a transcript of the Council minutes, 15 and it starts off: 16 "The minutes of a Council held at 17 Amherstberg on the 16th October, 1818 18 between John Askin, Esquire, 19 Superintendent of Indian Affairs and 20 the following Chippewa chiefs and 21 leaders of Chenail Ecarte, River St. 22 Clair, Sable, and Thames and Bear 23 Creek." 24 And then he lists all of the names which 25 I'm going to talk about the names of the chiefs

61

1 afterwards. And there is a -- the local army official is 2 in attendance and there's an interpreters -- John 3 Baptiste Cadeau who was quite a well known interpreter in 4 that area. 5 So, the -- this is what the minutes of the 6 Council say: 7 "After the superintendent of Indian 8 Affairs had informed the above 9 mentioned chiefs that he had received 10 instructions from the Deputy 11 Superintendent General of Indian 12 Affairs signifying that it was the wish 13 of their great fathers' representative, 14 Sir Peregrine Maitland, Lieutenant 15 Governor of this province to purchase 16 all the lands belonging to them, the 17 Chippewas, lying north of the River 18 Thames including the River Aux Sable 19 and a sketch of the territory required 20 being shown to them. 21 They were des -- desired to state on 22 what terms they would dispose of said 23 tract. Their answer, after mature 24 deliberation, was as follows: 25 Father, we Chippewas have always

62

1 been obedient children, and never 2 refused anything that our great father 3 has required of us. We are, therefore, 4 willing to sell our lands, but we wish 5 to make the following reserves. 6 First: Four (4) miles square, at 7 some distance below the rapids on the 8 River St. Claire. 9 Second: One (1) mile in front by 10 four (4) deep, bordering on the said 11 river, and adjoining to the Shawenoe 12 Reserve. 13 Third: Two (2) miles at Kettle 14 Point, Lake Huron. 15 Fourth: Two (2) miles square at the 16 River Aux Sable. 17 Fifth: Two (2) miles square at 18 Bears Creek, also a reserve for Tomago, 19 and his Band, up the Thames, which he 20 will point out when he arrives. And we 21 trust that the reserves now made by us 22 will be augmented at the time the 23 purchase is finally concluded. Should 24 our great father's representatives see 25 that they are insufficient for the

63

1 whole of our nation, now living on this 2 side of the waters to plant corn and 3 hunt, so that we will not be poor and 4 miserable, like our brethren on the 5 American side. 6 We, who have sold all our lands and 7 who have not made sufficient reserves 8 for their men, women and children to 9 plant." 10 Excuse me, I read that wrong. I'll just 11 back up: 12 "So that we will not be poor and 13 miserable like our brethren on the 14 American side, who have sold all their 15 land and have not made sufficient 16 reserves for their men, women and 17 children to plant corn. 18 Father, you will inform our great 19 father's representative, that it is our 20 wish he himself set the valuation on 21 the tract required. But that payment 22 is to be made annually for fifty (50) 23 years, half in hard money and half in 24 clothing. 25 The payment for our lands is to be

64

1 separate and distinct from the presents 2 our great father, the King, gives us 3 yearly, for our loyal and past 4 services. But out of our yearly 5 payments to our Nation, is to be 6 furnished with -- payments our Nation, 7 is to be furnished with a blacksmith 8 and husbandman to be stationed near the 9 reserves. The former to mind our axes 10 and traps and repair our guns, the 11 latter to instruct us in the -- the art 12 of husbandry." 13 So, I'm -- I'm just going to make a few 14 comments on -- on some of the things that -- that they -- 15 some of the particular things that they -- that the 16 Chippewa spokesman asked for and commented on in -- in 17 this -- in this minute. 18 First of all, you notice that they -- the 19 -- the Chippewa say -- they -- they refer to the 20 relationship that they have with the British, and they 21 say: 22 "We've always been obedient serv -- 23 children, we never refused anything." 24 And that -- that metaphoric language of -- 25 of the child and the father is -- you have to be careful

65

1 in English when you read this, because in -- in English 2 culture, we think of a father and a child as being a 3 relationship of -- of dominance and subservience, that - 4 - that children are -- have to be obedient to the -- to 5 the father. 6 The -- the metaphor, the aboriginal 7 metaphor of the father and the children, is -- it 8 concentrates more on the -- the relationship of respect 9 and the relationship of the kind of obligations that a 10 father has to his children, that a father has the 11 obligation to -- to guard the children, to be respectful 12 of the children, and to -- to provide for the children. 13 So, it's a -- it's a very different 14 relationship, if you're looking from a British cultural 15 perspective, or an aboriginal perspective. 16 So, the metaphor throughout aboriginal -- 17 aboriginal diplomatic language, you see all these rela -- 18 these metaphors of -- that are kinship metaphors, father, 19 children, uncles and other kinship references. So, that 20 -- that's the first thing that I would alert you to 21 there. 22 The second thing that -- that is 23 interesting about this council minute men, is -- is right 24 away the -- the Chippewa leaders point out the specific 25 places that they want as reserves. And they already have

66

1 a notion of what it means to have reserves set aside for 2 them because they make the comment about how they don't 3 want to be like their brethren on the American side. 4 Their -- their relatives that live on the 5 -- the American side who have found themselves miserable 6 because they don't have enough of a land base to subside 7 on. So, they -- they enumerate the particular locations 8 that they want. 9 Also I -- I think that we should remember 10 here where they say that they're asking -- the Chippewa 11 are asking the -- the Lieutenant Governor to decide what 12 he thinks is the appropriate compensation for the land 13 where he says, Father you will inform our great father's 14 representative, who's the Lieutenant Governor, because 15 the great father is the King, the representative is the 16 Lieutenant Governor. So they're saying, tell the 17 Lieutenant Governor that it's our wish that he himself 18 set the valuation on the tract. 19 So, he's saying he is -- and that again, 20 is an expression of a -- as a tremendous amount of trust, 21 that they trust the Lieutenant Governor when he says how 22 much money he's going to pay for the tract, that he's 23 going to be fair and honourable in setting the -- the 24 amount of money. 25 But what they ask for, is they want the

67

1 payments for fifty (50) years and they want half of the 2 payment in money, in hard -- in hard money and they want 3 the other half in clothing. So, you can see that they 4 are looking to their -- their future security. They want 5 clothing because clothing is actually something that's 6 very difficult to come by particularly at this time where 7 hunting is not as lucrative as it was and -- and 8 clothing is something that you have to obtain in -- in 9 trade. 10 These people were use to already getting 11 cloth as annual presents; it's highly desirable. Also, 12 money was highly desirable. There was very little money 13 in circulation in this time period. So they're asking 14 part in money, part in clothing. 15 And then the next thing that they -- that 16 they point out is, they're saying that they want the 17 payment for the land so the compensation for the land 18 they're ceding to be separate and distinct from the 19 presents that our Great Father the King gives us yearly. 20 So, when they're talking about those 21 presents that the Great Father gives them, here they're 22 referring to the annual presents. And the annual 23 presents were something that was given out by the Crown 24 every year. It's often referred to as His Majesty's 25 Bounty. And this -- these were presents that the British

68

1 gave out as a symbol of the -- the alliance relationship 2 that the -- that the British had with the First Nations. 3 So, they're saying, we're going to be paid 4 for our land, but that's not to be confused with the 5 annual payments that we get the presents that we're 6 already getting every year. And then they ask for a 7 blacksmith and a husbandman which is like a farm 8 instructor. And they're again here looking to their 9 future. 10 They want a blacksmith because a 11 blacksmith is needed to -- to repair and keep metal guns, 12 traps and tools in shape. And they're asking for the 13 husbandman who is someone whose going to assist them in - 14 - in learning how to farm. So, that's our -- that's the 15 first time in -- in these documents that I'm dealing with 16 that we hear the voice of the Chippewa, what it is that - 17 - what it is that they want in terms of their ceding that 18 -- the land. 19 So, after that -- after that council 20 meeting with Askin the -- Askin calls -- so this is the - 21 - this is the opening -- the opening negotiation for the 22 treaty and this would be the normal procedure at this 23 time for making a treaty. 24 So, there's this opening council and Askin 25 reports on that. The following year, Askin is going to

69

1 call these same chiefs together once again in order to 2 make the treaty. Now, by this time, the Government has 3 decided that they want to take this treaty in two (2) 4 parts. 5 They're going to split it into -- into two 6 (2) geographical areas and the -- the area along the 7 Thames River they're going to take in one treaty which is 8 called the Longwoods Treaty and the northern area they're 9 going to take in the Huron Tract Treaty. 10 Q: And it's the latter treaty with which 11 we are concerned? 12 A: Yes, the Huron Tract Treaty. And 13 when Askin calls the -- calls them together, this time 14 when he talks about who is -- who the land belongs to, 15 for the first time we see him use the term Kettle Point. 16 And that document is -- it's document 13 and it's at Tab 17 113. 18 But what -- the relevance instead of 19 taking you right to the document, the relevant section of 20 it is he talks about this -- this area of land and he 21 says: 22 "The whole of the land required by the 23 Crown belongs to the River St. Clair, 24 Kettle Point, River Aux Sable and River 25 Thames Chippewas."

70

1 And in this case, he's talking to all the 2 -- he's referring to all the land that's - - that's going 3 to be encompassed in both of those treaties. 4 Q: All right. And just for the record, 5 that's Inquiry Document Number 4000013. 6 A: Yeah, and in the report, you'll see 7 that -- that little quotation that I just read is at the 8 page at the top -- the first paragraph on page 14. 9 So, Askin meets with these chiefs in -- in 10 March 1819 and he makes a provisional agreement with 11 them. Now, in this -- when he makes this provisional 12 agreement I -- I'm unsure why but, for some reason, the 13 British have got their geography sorted out a little 14 better and in this -- in this -- in this provisional 15 agreement they talk about this land being just over 2.7 16 million acres as opposed to the first time he talked 17 about he was thinking that it was in the neighbourhood of 18 seven hundred and twelve thousand (712,000) acres. 19 So, it's a signif -- significant change in 20 the acreage. In that -- that first agreement, that 1819 21 provisional agreement, the -- the chiefs again, they ask 22 for the same reserves as they did in the 1818 Council 23 Minute, but it's only the first four (4) reserves because 24 the last two (2) reserves that they talked about in 1818 25 now belong to the -- to the people who are in the

71

1 Longwoods Tract Treaty. 2 So, just looking at the Huron Tract 3 Treaty, they again ask for the same reserves; the four 4 (4) miles square at the rapids of the River St. Clair 5 which becomes known as the Sarnia Reserve or the Upper -- 6 the Upper Reserve. 7 The -- they ask for the one (1) mile by 8 four (4) miles on the River St. Clair which becomes known 9 as Moore Township or the Lower Reserve. And then they 10 ask for the two (2) miles square at River Aux Sable and 11 they ask for the two (2) miles at Kettle Point, Lake 12 Huron. 13 Q: And just -- just for clarification, 14 the reserve at the River Aux Sable later became known 15 as...? 16 A: The Stony Point Reserve. 17 Q: Thank you. 18 A: Now, that -- that agreement that was 19 made in 1819 as would be the -- the usual process, that 20 agreement was sent to the British authorities, the 21 Imperial authorities, for their approval and they did not 22 approve it. 23 And the reason that the British did not 24 approve that 1819 provisional treaty was that the 25 Chippewa had asked for half their compensation in money

72

1 and half in goods. And the Brit -- and they asked for it 2 to be paid over a fifty (50) year period, and the British 3 only wanted to pay annuities, and they only wanted to pay 4 in goods, they did not want to have to pay out any hard - 5 - hard cash. 6 It's right -- it's right in this time 7 period that the British have decided for fiscal reasons, 8 that they -- all Treaties, they want to pay the Treaty 9 compensation in annual payments, which become known as 10 annuity payments. So, these would be payments that 11 people would get every year, perpetually, forever. 12 So, the British did not approve that -- 13 that agreement -- that provisional agreement made by 14 Askin. 15 And it's not until 1825 that the British 16 give a second set of instructions to go ahead and -- and 17 get the -- and seek the Treaty. And so in 1825, the -- 18 by this time Askin has passed away, and the -- the new 19 Indian Superintendent at the time, whose name is James 20 Givins, he -- he goes out to seek the provisional 21 agreement, again, meeting with the Chiefs at Amherstburg, 22 and this -- this provisional agreement is -- Treaty 23 Number 27 1/2. 24 And when the instructions are given for 25 that -- to take that provisional agreement, they -- they

73

1 refer to the -- the agreement that Askin had made in 2 1819. 3 So, Givins meets with them, he makes -- he 4 makes another provisional agreement. I'll talk a little 5 bit more about the -- the actual terms a little bit 6 later, but the -- one (1) of the things is that the 7 compensation is -- is lower than -- than originally 8 discussed. 9 After the provisional agreement is made, 10 the -- the Crown has the lands surveyed. So, the land 11 is being surveyed while the provisional agreement goes to 12 the -- the Imperial authorities, to be -- to be verified 13 -- to be approved of. 14 Q: And when you say the land is being 15 surveyed, do you mean the reserve lands, or what are you 16 referring to? 17 A: Both. What -- the -- a surveyor, 18 Mahlon Burwell, he goes up to the area, he surveys the 19 boundary of the ceded tract. So, he -- he looks at the 20 whole -- the whole boundary of the ceded tract, and he 21 also surveys out the boundaries of the reserves, where 22 exactly the reserves are located. 23 And so when the -- and -- and that again, 24 was a usual kind of practice at that time, so that when 25 the final Treaty is made, in -- two (2) years later in

74

1 1827, the Huron Tract Treaty. When that -- when that 2 Treaty is written up, at that time they know the -- the 3 proper description of the boundaries, and they know the 4 actual acreage of both the area that's being ceded and 5 the area of the reserves. 6 And I -- and I'm going to talk a little 7 bit more specifically about that afterwards. 8 But if we go and -- and look at the Treaty 9 itself, I'll just go through the terms of the final 10 Treaty, it's -- it's document number 23, and it's at Tab 11 3. 12 Q: That's Inquiry document number 13 4000023. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 A: And in -- in the documents that I've 18 provided in the book, there's -- there's both a 19 manuscript copy of it, which is the handwritten copy, 20 which you see on the screen is three (3) pages of that. 21 And the -- the version that is printed in the -- the 22 Treaties and Surrenders Book. 23 So, I'm -- I'm not going to read the whole 24 Treaty, because the language is very difficult, but I -- 25 I'm just going to go through it -- you know, very kind of

75

1 briefly and point out some of the -- the features of it. 2 So it starts off -- it -- it becomes known 3 as Treaty 29, because the Crown started to number all -- 4 all of these early treaties to keep them separate, one 5 (1) from the other. 6 So it was made on the 10th day of July in 7 1827, between the Crown and the -- the First Nation 8 leaders and their names are, in fact, listed in the -- in 9 the printed version of the Treaty. And their names 10 appear at the end of the Treaty written in English and in 11 the manuscript copy, the handwritten copy of the Treaty 12 you'll see that their names are written and there are -- 13 the -- their totem signs are beside their names. 14 So if you look up on the screen on the -- 15 the third page, you'll see all the -- the -- the totem 16 marks that the -- that leaders had made beside their 17 names. 18 Q: And this is Slide Number 4, just for 19 the record. 20 A: Yes, Slide Number 4. So in the text 21 of the treaty, it -- it -- it names the -- the -- the 22 leaders and identifies them as being the -- the chiefs 23 and principal men of the part of the Chippewa nation who 24 -- who claims -- who occupy and claim the land that -- 25 that's being ceded.

76

1 And they -- they say in the Treaty -- they 2 specify in the Treaty that the land is being ceded or 3 it's being appropriated by the Crown for the -- purpose 4 of cultivation and settlement of the tract of land. 5 And they refer to the provisional 6 agreement that had been made in 1825. 7 Towards the bottom of that first page, it 8 says in the very last paragraph: 9 "And whereas the tract -- the tract of 10 land intended and agreed to be 11 surrendered as aforesaid has been since 12 accurately surveyed so that the same as 13 well as certain small reservations 14 expressly to be made by the Indians 15 from and out of the said tract for the 16 use of themselves and their posterity 17 can now be certainly defined." 18 And, in the -- in the treaty they -- they 19 -- they do describe them. 20 Q: Can you just tell us what page of the 21 treaty you're reading from? 22 A: Oh, I -- I beg your pardon. It's in 23 the first -- in the -- in the document that's at Tab 3 on 24 the very first -- it's page -- it's in the Treaties book, 25 it's Page 71 which is the right hand side of the page.

77

1 You'll see Number 29, which is the number of the treaty 2 and I was reading from the very last paragraph. 3 Q: Thank you. 4 A: So if we move to the next page, which 5 is on the left hand side of the page. It's got number 72 6 at the top, in that first paragraph it says that -- that 7 the head men are ceding up this land and it's about the 8 fourth line down: 9 "For and in consideration of the annual 10 sum or payment of one thousand and one 11 hundred (1,100) pounds of lawful money 12 of the province of Upper Canada to be 13 paid by His Majesty, his heirs, and 14 successors to the said Indians and 15 their posterity in each and every year 16 in the manner hereafter mentioned." 17 So we'll see here that the sum of money is 18 eleven hundred (1,100) pounds. And towards the very 19 bottom of this page, after they -- they go on and they 20 describe the -- the survey description of -- of the 21 boundaries of the reserve which is very long and tedious 22 to read. 23 And towards the end of the -- the -- that 24 page, they note that now that the land has been surveyed, 25 they know that that -- the area being surrendered is

78

1 2,201,000 acres, more or less. 2 And then they go on to describe the -- the 3 reserves that are being set aside out of that land. And 4 so at the -- starting about the sixth line up it says: 5 "And expressly reserving to the said 6 Nation of Indians and their -- 7 posterity at all times hereafter for 8 their own exclusive use and enjoyment 9 the part or parcel of the said tract 10 which is hereafter particularly 11 described and which is situated at the 12 mouth of the River Aux Sable on Lake 13 Huron, that is to say ..." 14 Then there is the surveyor's description. 15 So that -- here they're describing the reserve at the 16 River Aux Sable on Lake Huron which is later known as the 17 Stony Point Reserve. 18 And it is two thousand six hundred and 19 fifty (2,650) acres. Then, next, they go on to describe 20 the reserve at Kettle Point which is two thousand, four 21 hundred and sixty-four (2,464) -- forty-six (46) acres, 22 pardon me. 23 And then they go on and they describe the 24 two (2) reserves on -- which become the Sarnia Reserve 25 and the Moore Township Reserve.

79

1 Now, if you go over to the next page which 2 is on the top of the pages is number 74 and 75, at the 3 bottom of page 74 which is on the left-hand side, they 4 talk about how the -- the compensation money is to be 5 delivered. 6 So this is the one thousand, one hundred 7 (1,100) pounds of lawful money in goods. So here they 8 describe that this -- this money is -- the eleven hundred 9 (1,100) pounds is going to be distributed in goods. So 10 it's eleven hundred (1,100) pounds worth of goods. 11 Q: And you indicated earlier that their 12 request had initially been for half goods and half money? 13 A: That's -- half goods and half money 14 and it was the -- the hard currency money part of it that 15 the Crown wouldn't sanction. So -- but there's a little 16 bit of a catch to the -- to the goods and I'm going to 17 read you the bottom part of this page 74 because -- and 18 basically the language is sometimes hard to understand. 19 But basically what they're saying is if 20 the -- the population of Chippewas at the time of this 21 treaty was supposed to be four hundred and forty (440) 22 people. And they're saying, if that population falls to 23 less than half of that, then the annuity is going to be 24 cut in proportion. 25 Q: Did the -- did the treaty address

80

1 what would happen if the population significantly 2 increased? 3 A: No. There's no provision for that. 4 So there's only a provision for decreasing the annuity 5 but not for increasing it. And I think that the reason 6 for that is because at this time period, 1827, the 7 attitude of the British Crown was, that the -- the Indian 8 population, the aboriginal people, were going to 9 disappear. 10 They -- they believed that the aboriginal 11 people could not -- could not sustain the onslaught of 12 the white settlers and that they would -- that they would 13 disappear. 14 So, when they made their treaty, they are 15 making it in such a way that if, in fact, the people do 16 die off, that they won't owe -- they won't owe as much 17 money as the population decreases. 18 So, just starting from the bottom of that 19 it says: 20 "In the delivery or distribution of the 21 said goods, each individual composing 22 that part of the Chippewa Nation which 23 has heretofore inhabited and enclaimed 24 the said tract hereby surrendered. And 25 each individual with their posterity

81

1 shall be entitled to an equal share. 2 And that if it shall happen hereafter 3 that by death or removal the number of 4 -- of such individuals which it is 5 declared and agreed by the said Chiefs 6 and principal men of the said Indians 7 does, at the time of the execution of 8 this surrender amount to four hundred 9 and forty (440)." 10 So, what they're saying there is 11 everyone's agreed that there's four hundred and forty 12 (440) Chippewas who are part of this Treaty. 13 "So if that -- if that number, four 14 hundred and forty (440) shall fall 15 below half -- so does at the time of 16 the execution of this surrender amount 17 to four hundred and forty (440) shall 18 fall below half of their present 19 number, then the said annuity shall be 20 hence forth reduced one-half (). And 21 continue to so reduce until and unless 22 it shall happen that the residue shall 23 in like manner be therefore reduced by 24 1/2 when the said annuity shall be 25 therefore reduced in the same

82

1 proportion. And that the same 2 principle shall continue to prevail 3 provided however that there shall be no 4 reduction in the said annuity by reason 5 of any decrease of numbers so long as 6 the said Indians or their posterity 7 equal in number one-half of the number 8 entitled to the claim by the last 9 preceding numeration." 10 So basically what all of that is saying is 11 that if -- if the -- the number drops to less than half 12 then the annuity is also going to drop to less than half. 13 But as -- as I already pointed out, there is no provision 14 for it increasing. 15 Q: Thank you. If you're proceeding with 16 the next slide let's just wait til it comes up. 17 A: I apologize for this, I have no idea 18 why it does -- it goes to sleep on me. 19 Q: We'll just get some technical 20 assistance for you. 21 A: I guess I shouldn't talk so long on 22 one (1) slide. It gets bored and goes to sleep. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

83

1 A: Thank you for your patience. Okay, so 2 this is the next -- 3 Q: It's still, I'm sorry, it's still not 4 actually on the screen. There it is. Okay. 5 A: Oh, Okay. So this is the next slide 6 that I have about the Treaty itself and what I've done 7 here, this is a chart that -- that we made at our office 8 and basically what I did here was I -- I listed in each 9 of the columns, you'll see the -- the first column on the 10 left says, Council 1818. 11 And I list down there the names of the 12 chieftain headmen who had taken part in that council and 13 a little square brackets after their names, I have the 14 name of their totem. Now, I don't expect that everyone 15 can read this tiny little writing and really it's just 16 for illustration purposes to show you that, you know, the 17 first column is Council 1818. 18 The next one (1) is the provisional 19 agreement that was made by Askin in 1819. The next 20 column is the Treaty 27 1/2 which was that provisional 21 agreement from 1825 made by Givins. And in the last 22 column is Treaty 29 which is the Huron Tract Treaty which 23 was concluded in 1827. 24 And what I'm trying to do with that chart 25 is just give you kind of a visual of the fact that by and

84

1 large it's the same chiefs who were at these Councils and 2 who approved it. Because one (1) of the things -- one 3 (1) of the things that I would do, looking at the process 4 of a Treaty, is to see if it's the same Chiefs and 5 headmen that -- that attend the various Council minutes 6 and take part in the Treaties. 7 And there's a -- this chart that I made 8 for this Power Point, there's a slightly more detailed 9 chart in -- in the back of my report, as one (1) of the 10 appendices. 11 Q: And it's Appendix B, located at Tab 12 1-B of the Expert's Brief. 13 A: Thank you. And so when -- when I was 14 doing this, there was a couple of things that I was 15 looking at, and again, this has to do with, you know, who 16 took part in the Treaty. I wanted to know if the same 17 Chiefs and headmen were attending and -- and were taking 18 part in making the Treaty. 19 And I wanted to know what their Totems or 20 their Dodaims were, their family clan identifiers, 21 because I was interested in knowing if this was a very 22 mixed group of people in -- in terms of clans, and if 23 they were -- if there was consistency. 24 And also, it helps, because in this period 25 of history, Aboriginal leaders were using their totems

85

1 when they signed documents, and their totems were 2 identified by many, even British Indian Department 3 officials would know somebody's totem. 4 So, we have records of that, and it's a 5 way to verify if this is really the same person, because 6 we know their Totem is the same. If their Totem changes 7 it's -- it's not the same person. 8 And one (1) of the big difficulties doing 9 this kind of research in this early period is all of 10 these names are English renditions of Anishinaabek name, 11 so the spelling is very problematic, the spelling 12 changes, and it's sometimes very difficult to trace 13 people. 14 So, when I made up this chart that's -- 15 that was my purpose of doing it, is to figure out who -- 16 who was there and are there any people that took part in 17 this that -- that we particularly identify in -- in later 18 records. 19 And in this case there's a couple of 20 people that I'm particularly interested in. And I'll 21 just point them out on the chart. 22 First of all, you'll see there's -- where 23 did he go? Here's Wapagus who's -- who's Caribou, and 24 this -- this man shows up later when we start looking at 25 records that have to do with Kettle and Stony Point. We

86

1 see this Chief's name, Wawanosh, and according to records 2 from the community, historical records, Wawanosh, his 3 descendants, a lot of them have the name Johnson. And -- 4 Q: Just for the record you're pointing 5 at the column, last name Treaty Number 27 1/2? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: So, we see his -- his signature and 8 his Dodaim on this Treaty 27, which was made in 1825. 9 It's the only time we see him, unless he is somebody 10 whose name was in -- who attended one (1) of these other 11 Councils, or his name is on one (1) of these other 12 Treaties, but we don't recognize the name, because -- 13 because the spelling is problematic. So, that's always 14 kind of a caveat with these things. 15 The other person that I want to point out 16 to you is -- where did he go? Here he is, Quaikegwan, 17 who is spelled many different ways, he's Beaver dodaim, 18 and we see that he is -- if you look in the column, the 19 Provisional Agreement of 1819, he's the fourth line from 20 the bottom. We also see him as a signatory of the 21 Provisional Agreement, and we see him with Treaty 29 in 22 1827, and he is a man who shows up also at -- at Aux 23 Sable, at Stony Point. 24 There's -- there's one (1) other name 25 here, which is in the Treaty 27 1/2 column, one (1), two

87

1 (2), three (3), four (4), five (5) lines from the 2 bottom -- 3 Q: Is that the fourth name from the 4 bottom? 5 A: Yes, the fourth name from the bottom. 6 Chaoge-man, who's beaver I think, because it was hard to 7 read his dodaim and I think he's the same person as 8 Shaiowkima in the Treaty 29. 9 This may be the -- the Chief that the 10 surveyor met at Kettle Point but the name is so 11 problematic I can't really tell. So it's -- it's kind of 12 a guess. Just -- just out of interest, up the side of 13 the -- of this Slide Number 5, you'll see some dodaims 14 and they -- they're all taken -- they're ones that were 15 scanned off -- off treaties. And it's just an 16 illustration to show you some of the -- some of the 17 totems and what they -- what they look like if you don't 18 have the chance to look at the -- the actual manuscripts. 19 And the one (1) -- the one (1) at the top 20 that's labeled caribou on the top of the right hand side 21 of that slide, right beside the number 5. It might not 22 look much like a caribou to you, but as Professor Darlene 23 Johnston had pointed out -- and -- is that -- that's the 24 hoof print of the caribou and in some historical works 25 some scholars have called that antler, thinking that it

88

1 looks like the caribou antler. 2 So basically with that slide, I just 3 wanted to -- to point out the -- the fact that for the 4 most part there -- there's a -- there's a -- a large 5 degree of overlap between the -- the chiefs who took part 6 in this various stages of making Treaty 27. And that 7 some of the names, Wapagus and Quaikegwan are two (2) 8 names that -- that we know show up later in the 9 historical record of being chiefs who are at the River 10 Aux Sable. 11 Q: Just before you prepare to move -- 12 just before you do move on, I note that for the 1818 13 Council, at that Council there are twenty-four (24) 14 chiefs asking for six (6) locations, which of course then 15 included those two (2) reserves that belonged to the 16 Longwood Tracts Treaty, but then in 1819 there were 17 eighteen (18) chiefs asking for four (4) locations, being 18 the four (4) that you have described. 19 In 1825 there were twenty (20) chiefs, 20 asking for four (4) locations -- the same locations, of 21 course. And in 1827, there were eighteen (18) chiefs 22 asking for four (4) locations again, the four (4) you've 23 described. 24 Can you just tell me what the significance 25 of the fact that there were so many chiefs asking for

89

1 these same four (4) locations? 2 A: Right. Well I think -- I think it's 3 -- I think it's -- it's significant for a couple of 4 reasons. First of all, the -- the number of chiefs is -- 5 is -- is consistent. So we have twenty-four (24) when -- 6 when they're 7 doing both the tracts, and then it goes down to eighteen 8 (18), twenty (20) and eighteen (18) as they -- they 9 negotiate the treaty. 10 So those are the numbers of chiefs or 11 leaders that are recognized by the people at that time 12 when that treaty's made. So that -- they're the -- the 13 chiefs, the head men, the prominent people in the -- in 14 the part of the Chippewa nation that is ceding that land. 15 And you'll see that they ask for four (4) 16 different locations. So what it says to me is that those 17 -- those people have these four (4) different locations 18 that they -- that they believe are the most significant 19 and important locations for them to have as a -- as a 20 group. And by the -- by the numbers you're seeing that 21 the people are anticipating that there's going to be more 22 than one (1) chief in all of those locations. 23 Like if you did simple math, which doesn't 24 really quite apply but just if you did simple math, 25 you're looking at four (4) to five (5) chiefs in each

90

1 area. Now, we know that the reserves as they're set 2 aside are different in size, so it wouldn't be four (4) 3 or five (5) for each of those four (4) locations. 4 But what it does tell us is that at that 5 time, in 1827, the nation had that many people that they 6 recognized as chiefs, and those chiefs were expecting 7 that they would be living in locations where there would 8 be more than one (1) chief at -- at each location. 9 A: All right. Thank you. 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: If you're finished with 11 your discussion of slide 5, I wonder, Commissioner, it's 12 one o'clock, if we might take the lunch break? 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Are you 14 okay? This would be a good time to adjourn for lunch. I 15 think we -- can you hear me, somebody said they couldn't 16 hear me. Can you hear me? I think we've agreed to 17 adjourn to 2:15. 18 We'll adjourn now for lunch until 2:15. 19 Thank you very much. 20 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 21 adjourned until 2:15. 22 23 --- Upon recessing at 1:00 p.m. 24 --- Upon resuming at 2:15 p.m. 25

91

1 THE REGISTRAR: Order. All rise. This 2 Inquiry is now resumed. 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: Thank you, Ms. Holmes. You were at - 7 - we are discussing slide 5. Are we ready to move on to 8 the next slide? 9 A: Yes, thank you. 10 Q: I just might add before we leave this 11 slide, that we've -- it's been brought to our attention 12 that the hard copy of slide 5 which we distributed to 13 counsel is -- is in error and we'll be producing a 14 corrected copy, both for the record and for all counsel 15 in the morning. Thank you. 16 A: So, I'm just going to finish up on 17 the treaty. This next slide shows the -- the surrendered 18 tract. And you'll notice that here this shaded area on 19 the map shows the Huron Tract as it was finally surveyed 20 on the southeast shore of Lake Huron. 21 And underneath the surrendered tract 22 you'll see an area of land that's bounded on the north by 23 the southern boundary of the Huron Tract and it comes 24 down along the east side of the St. Clair River and Lake 25 St. Clair and then you'll see a river coming into Lake

92

1 St. Clair that I'm indicating here and which is labelled 2 the Thames River. 3 So, this area in here between the Thames 4 River and the Huron Tract was that Longwoods Tract Treaty 5 that -- that I spoke about before; that's just for your 6 orientation. 7 If you remember, when we talked about the 8 -- the negotiation of the surrender, in -- in 1818 when - 9 - when they -- or in 1819 -- no, excuse me, 1818 when 10 they first discussed the -- the tract that was being 11 asked for the -- Askin thought that that tract was about 12 seven thousand (7,000) -- seven hundred and twelve 13 thousand (712,000) acres and then when they talked about 14 the tract in the 1825 treaty they had discovered that it 15 was really more like 2.7 million acres. 16 After -- after Burwell had made his survey 17 and in the final treaty, the tract that was surrendered 18 ended up being 2.1 thousand -- 2.1 million acres. 19 So, along with that change in the acreage, 20 there was also a change in the -- the compensation, not 21 tied to the acreage. It was just, there was also -- the 22 point I'm trying to make is there was also a change in -- 23 in the negotiation process. 24 And, initially, in 1819 when Askin first 25 talked about giving a dollar value to the surrender

93

1 tract, he told the -- the Chippewa that were engaged in 2 the negotiations, that they were -- the Crown was 3 offering one thousand three hundred and seventy-five 4 (1,375) pounds, as compensation. And if you remember, 5 they had asked for it half in cash and half in goods. 6 When they -- when they made the final 7 determination of the -- of the amount that was going to 8 be offered in the Provisional Treaty in 1825, that sum 9 had been reduced to eleven hundred (1100) pounds. So, it 10 went to -- went from thirteen hundred and seventy-five 11 (1375) pound annuity to eleven hundred (1100) pound 12 annuity. 13 And the -- the one (1) thing I wanted to 14 explain to you about the annuity, which will help you to 15 understand future events, is the annuity -- the eleven 16 hundred (1100) pound annuity was to be paid to the 17 Chippewas who signed the Treaty, and their posterity, so 18 their descendants. 19 And at the time of the Treaty, when they 20 were -- they talked about the four hundred and forty 21 (440) people, they said that those four hundred and forty 22 (440) people who signed the Treaty, would all have an 23 equal share in the -- in the annuity. 24 Now, the way in which the payment, the 25 annuity payment of goods was actually given out was it

94

1 was not distributed per person. What the Crown did was 2 they brought the -- the goods on annuity Treaty day, and 3 they gave the goods in bulk to the various Chiefs, and 4 left it up to the Chiefs to then distribute the goods 5 amongst the members. 6 So, that was the actual way that -- that 7 it was done, up until about 1838. And after 1838, what 8 the Crown did was they converted the goods that were 9 being distributed as the annuity payment, to cash. But 10 again, the cash was not distributed to each and every 11 individual, the cash was funded for the people. 12 So, that -- what that means is that the 13 Department of Indian Affairs had an account that was for 14 the Chippewas of the Huron Tract Treaty, and the eleven 15 hundred (1100) pounds per annum went into that account, 16 and then the -- between the Indian Agent and the Council, 17 decisions were made about how to spend that money on 18 behalf of the Chippewas. 19 So, the annuity payment then -- it -- it 20 wasn't a per capita distribution. The other thing that - 21 - that I wanted -- and then, just to move even further 22 ahead in time, at the time of Confederation, the -- that 23 Treaty annuity payment was capitalized, and the -- the 24 interest earned from it is deposited every year in the -- 25 in the account of the -- of the First Nations.

95

1 So, but just to give you a little bit of a 2 sense of -- because eleven hundred (1100) pounds doesn't 3 really mean very much to us, if we think eleven hundred 4 (1100) pounds, well what did that mean in 1827? 5 So, to give you a sense of that, eleven 6 hundred (1100) pounds was the equivalent at that time of 7 about forty-four hundred dollars ($4400). So, that 8 money, the -- for -- it -- it converts to being about ten 9 dollars ($10) per person, or two (2) -- two (2) pounds 10 ten (10) shillings per person. 11 So, if we look at the -- the -- sort of 12 the -- the value of money at that time, a -- the Indian 13 interpreter, for example, who worked at Branford, which 14 was the Six Nations Reserve, around that time period his 15 annual salary was seventy-five (75) pounds a year. 16 So, if we compare that with -- with a 17 Chippewa family who was -- to whom this money was owed, 18 if you had a family of five (5), that would be about 19 twelve (12) pounds for a family of five (5), keeping in 20 mind that it wasn't actually a per capita distribution, 21 but I'm just trying to give you a -- a comparative. 22 So, about twelve dollars ($12) -- twelve 23 (12) pounds per year for a -- for a family of five (5). 24 That would be equivalent to a couple of months salary for 25 the -- the Indian interpreter at Branford or someone like

96

1 the -- the superintendent who -- who worked for Indian 2 Affairs who was involved in taking the treaty. 3 He was making about a hundred and eighty- 4 five (185) pounds a year. So, that just gives you a 5 sense of -- of what -- of what that money -- what that 6 money was actually worth and what the people got for -- 7 for ceding up all that land which was, of course, the 8 land upon which they -- they made their living. 9 Q: Thank you. 10 A: So I'm going to move to the next 11 slide. 12 Q: Can we just recap for a moment then? 13 The thirteen hundred and seventy-five (1,375) pounds that 14 was the initial offer from the Imperial Crown; at the 15 time of that offer, what was the estimate of the number 16 of acres being ceded? 17 A: 2.7 million. 18 Q: Okay. And at the end, then, it was 19 eleven hundred (1,100) pounds, per annum with respect to 20 2.1 million acres ceded? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: Thank you. 23 A: Okay, on this slide, I -- I'm just 24 going to talk -- focus a little bit more on the location 25 of the reserves that were set aside under that treaty and

97

1 you'll see on the -- on the map on the -- on the slide 2 number 7, again the -- the dark area shows the entire 3 area of the -- the Huron Tract Treaty. 4 We see the boundaries. So, this coloured 5 section shows the -- the entire tract. These dark little 6 squares show the location of the reserves. 7 So -- and just for orientation purposes, 8 this is Walpole Island. These people at Walpole Island, 9 some of their chiefs took part in this treaty. Walpole 10 Island is not a reserve set aside under this treaty. 11 Walpole Island existed prior to this time and it was an 12 Indian refuge. It's unceded territory and there's a 13 number of nations that live there. 14 But the reserves that were set aside under 15 the treaty are the Sarnia reserve or -- which is also 16 known as the Upper Reserve on the St. Clair River. And 17 you can see on this little chart on the bottom of the 18 slide, it's just over ten thousand (10,000) acres. 19 This small reserve further down the St. 20 Clair River is called the Moore Township reserve and it's 21 a -- two thousand five hundred and seventy-five (2,575) 22 acres. And just for information purposes, the -- this 23 reserve was surrendered away in 1843, so we don't really 24 hear much more about it. 25 Now, up here are the two (2) reserves

98

1 we're most interested in. The one furthest west is the 2 Kettle Point reserve and you see it labelled on the -- on 3 the slide. And the one to the west and slightly north -- 4 Q: To the east. 5 A: Sorry. To the east and slightly 6 north, is the Stony Point reserve, also known in the 7 records as the Aux Sable reserve. And one of the things 8 that you'll probably notice about these two (2) reserves 9 is that they are very close together. 10 It's a matter of miles between them. The 11 -- the Aux Sable reserve, as it shows on the chart at the 12 bottom, is -- is two thousand six hundred and fifty 13 (2,650) acres and the Kettle Point reserve was two 14 thousand four hundred and forty-six (2,246) acres as they 15 were surveyed by Burwell. 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: Now, one of the interesting things 18 that I just want to point out about the reserves as well, 19 is that when they first -- when the Crown first started 20 to talk about those reserves and if you remember from 21 earlier this morning, from the very beginning of the 22 negotiations, those reserves were the reserves that the 23 Chippewa had identified as the areas they wanted. 24 When they first started talking about the 25 reserves, the four (4) reserves that are shown up here on

99

1 the slide number 7, those reserves were thought to 2 comprise together, just over twenty-three thousand 3 (23,000) acres of land. 4 After Burwell did his survey and surveyed 5 the -- the four (4) reserves, it was found that they 6 contained just less than eighteen thousand (18,000) 7 acres, it was -- together the four (4) of them is 8 seventeen thousand nine hundred and fifty-one (17,951) 9 acres, which is about a quarter less than what they were 10 first thought to -- to consist of. 11 And just as a little point of interest, 12 when -- when Burwell went up and did his survey, and if 13 you remember, he did the survey between the time of the 14 1825 Provisional Treaty and the -- the confirmed Treaty 15 in 1827. 16 He -- he met a Chief at Kettle Point, 17 Chief -- who he calls, Chief Chomokomon (phonetic); I 18 don't know, you know, how good a spelling or a rendition 19 of his actual name that is. But this is the Chief whose 20 descendants are believed to be -- to make up the 21 families, the Shawanoos and Shaw -- Shawkons (phonetic) 22 that you see in the record. 23 And when Burwell did his survey, he drew a 24 little sketch of -- of the chief's camp, and it's on the 25 first slide, and I'm just going to flip back to the

100

1 slides to show it to you, because it's -- it's a very 2 interesting image. 3 That -- that's the image that -- that 4 Burwell drew, and you'll see in it, there's a tree with 5 what Burwell says is a bedroom up in the tree, and -- and 6 the little house and the chiefs war pole and flags beside 7 -- beside the house. 8 So, this is a -- a typical kind of 9 surveyor's drawing of -- of something of interest that he 10 came across. So, he talks about that Chief, and he knows 11 that that Chief is living -- and this camp that he has is 12 -- is right at Kettle Point. So, that was 1827, when he 13 was there. 14 Q: Was that 1827 or '26? 15 A: '26, I beg your pardon, when he did 16 the survey. 17 Q: Hmm hmm. 18 A: So, I'm just going to go back to my 19 slides here. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 A: Okay, so, I think I'll move on now to 24 -- to give some information about the -- the early 25 administration of the Huron Tract, Chippewa, after the

101

1 time of Treaty, because now that they -- the -- the 2 people have -- have come into Treaty with the Crown, have 3 surrendered land and have had reserves set up and now the 4 Crown is paying them an annuity, the Indian Department 5 becomes even more involved in their administration. 6 So, I think one (1) of the -- the 7 important things that I -- that I would like to explain 8 around that, and I have two (2) slides on this -- the 9 topic of the early administration, is that the British 10 Indian Department at this time, treats the people who 11 signed the Huron Tract Treaty, as one (1) large band that 12 has an interest in the four (4) reserves that we've 13 discussed, and the eleven hundred (1100) -- eleven 14 hundred (1100) pound annuity, and also in any other 15 revenue that may be raised from the reserves or from 16 resources that are on the reserves. 17 And when we talk about their interest, 18 it's what -- it's what the Indian Department would call a 19 common and undivided interest. And in that way what they 20 meant by that was that every -- every individual that was 21 a signatory or a descendant of the people who signed that 22 Treaty, they all had an interest in all of those 23 reserves. 24 So, it didn't matter where they were 25 actually residing, they had the right to reside on any of

102

1 the four (4) reserves. They all had a right, an equal 2 right to the use of that eleven hundred (1100) pounds. 3 And that -- that becomes quite important. 4 And the -- the -- this issue of -- of them 5 being -- being treated as one big band was debated and it 6 was a question that the -- the Indian superintendents the 7 -- the officers who were in the communities, working with 8 the communities, they had this question: What was their 9 interest? 10 And that the -- the -- that question went 11 all the way up to the Governor General and I'm going to 12 refer you to a document were the Government -- where the 13 Governor General makes a declaration of his -- his 14 opinion on this question. 15 And the -- the document is document 365 16 and it's at Tab 94. And I'll just give you a minute to 17 go to that. 18 Q: And that would be Inquiry Document 19 Number 4000365. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 A: Okay? So, this document is -- it's 24 dated from 1843; so you see it's about fifteen (15) years 25 after the treaty. And it's written by a gentleman called

103

1 Rawson W. Rawson and he was the Chief Secretary to His 2 Excellency The Governor General, Sir Charles Metcalfe. 3 At this time period, the Indian Department 4 was under the -- under the jurisdiction of the Civil 5 Secretary who answered to the Imperial Government. So 6 Rawson is -- is writing on -- on behalf of the Governor 7 General. 8 And I'll just read the beginning part of 9 this letter. He -- he's writing to Samuel Peter Jarvis 10 who was the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs and 11 Rawson writes: 12 "Having submitted to the Governor 13 General your letter of the 18th instant 14 relative to the lands of the Chippewas 15 of St. Clair, I am commanded to inform 16 you that His Excellency considers the 17 four (4) reserves to be the common 18 property of the several bands entitled 19 to share in the annuity as the present 20 division or occupation of the lands has 21 been made without any reference to the 22 numbers of the Band or the extent and 23 value of the land, unless some 24 agreement has been formally made 25 between the Chiefs and ratified by

104

1 government which does not appear to 2 have been the case. If any such 3 agreement exists, you will be pleased 4 to report it. In the absence of such 5 an engagement, it is His Excellency's 6 opinion that the proceeds of any 7 portions of the four (4) reserves which 8 may have been or may hereafter be sold 9 should be equitable divided amongst the 10 several Bands and be appropriated as 11 may seem best for their common 12 benefit." 13 So, what -- what he's -- he's writing 14 about specifically in here has to do with some land -- 15 some land that's been contemplated to be sold at Sarnia 16 and wanting to know how to divide the proceeds. 17 So, you'll see in this letter that what 18 he's talking about -- he's talking about the four (4) 19 reserves. So, here he's talking about the four (4) 20 reserves set aside under the Huron Tract Treaty; it's the 21 common property of the several Bands entitled to share in 22 the annuity. So, the people who are entitled to share 23 that annuity of the Huron Tract have these four reserves 24 in common unless they make an agreement between them. 25 So, an agreement has to be made between

105

1 the four (4) Bands or between the people -- the -- yes, 2 he calls them the Bands, between the Bands and it has to 3 be ratified by the Government because this is what you'll 4 see in this time period and for a considerable length of 5 time that whenever any of the First Nations want to make 6 decisions the -- the Government has to approve it. So, 7 it's not they can't make decisions and have it put in 8 place without the -- the sanction of Government. 9 So basically what the Governor General is 10 saying is, in the absence of such an agreement that he -- 11 he believes that the proceeds have to be shared equit -- 12 equitably amongst them. And that -- that kind of 13 approach -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Excuse me. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Were you 19 reading from the written -- written letter or the typed 20 letter? 21 THE WITNESS: I was writt -- reading from 22 the typed transcript. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The typed 24 transcript reads "from their separate benefit," and when 25 you were reading, you said "common benefit."

106

1 So, I'm just wondering if you mean common 2 or separate or if there's a difference -- 3 THE WITNESS: Well, no. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Probably is. 5 THE WITNESS: Let me turn to that 6 exhibit -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: In the 8 second paragraph of the typed letter it says: 9 "May hereafter be sold, should be 10 equitably divided among the several 11 Bands and be appropriated as may seem 12 best for their separate benefit." 13 When you were reading out loud you said 14 "for their common benefit." 15 THE WITNESS: I'm just checking it in 16 the -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's hard to 18 read the written letter, so...though perhaps you can do 19 it. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: It's the third page. 24 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Third page, appears to 25 me to be "separate."

107

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 2 So, the typed version is -- 3 THE WITNESS: It's -- it's "separate 4 benefit." 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 So, you just made a slight mistake when you said "common" 7 there. It should be as is in the typed version "separate 8 benefit"? 9 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 Does that help you, Mr. Ross? 12 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Very much so. 13 THE WITNESS: I apologize for my 14 misreading of it. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You don't 16 have to. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: That's okay, please proceed. 20 A: Okay. So, the -- just the things 21 that I want to point out about that document is it's an 22 important document in the sense that it comes directly 23 from a -- a decision or an opinion of -- of the Governor 24 General, which is as opposed to sometimes we have letters 25 that are written by Indian agents, which are less

108

1 authoritative, because they have less authority. 2 And this is -- this kind of summarizes the 3 attitude of the Crown at that time, and that's what I 4 want to stress. This is -- this is what the Crown's 5 approach is, and because he has made this decision, then 6 the officers who are in the field are to conduct 7 themselves accordingly. So that -- that explains to us 8 their policy at that time. 9 So, I'm just going to go on to the next 10 slide. So, while we see that -- that the Crown has this 11 particular attitude, and approach to administration, that 12 -- that the people are actually living at four (4) 13 different locations -- well, they're still living at 14 five (5) different locations, because the Walpole Island 15 is still involved here. 16 And so, what I -- what I had shown you on 17 the slide here is I made a little chart. And the data 18 from this chart comes from a document from 1845, which is 19 just two (2) years after the -- the document we just read 20 and it shows you where the people are living, and the 21 approximate number of people. 22 And if you see on the chart that the top 23 bar graph on the chart, it has Sarnia written on the left 24 in a long blue bar, two hundred and fifty-nine (259). 25 There's two hundred and fifty-nine (259) people living at

109

1 Sarnia, according to some -- some census information from 2 the Indian Department at that time. 3 And at Walpole Island, which is the very 4 bottom -- the bottom bar on that graph, at Walpole Island 5 or Chenail Ecarte, we see there's three hundred and 6 nineteen (319) people. 7 Now, the people that we're most interested 8 in are shown in the -- in the middle bars. And according 9 to this 1845 census information which comes from a -- a 10 document I will read to you later, there's twenty-seven 11 (27) people at Kettle Point and at Aux Sable there's 12 thirty-five (35) people in Wapagus's Band and there's 13 forty-nine (49) people in Quaykigouin's Band. 14 And those -- so you can see the numbers 15 show that the sort of disproportionate number of people 16 who are living at -- at the -- at the different 17 locations. And this is -- it is this group of people who 18 the Indian Department is treating as one large regional 19 group that has the equal interest in the -- in the four 20 (4) reserves that Sarnia, Moore which has actually been - 21 - was surrendered just after that letter from the 22 Governor General. 23 So, he was talking about Sarnia, Moore, 24 Kettle Point and Aux Sable or Stony Point. And I'm -- 25 I'm going to read you the letter that these -- most of

110

1 these numbers come from because it's quite an interesting 2 letter written by the Indian superintendent who explains 3 a little bit about how he is managing the affairs of 4 these people at this time. And this -- this document, 5 it's Document Number 366 and you'll find it at Tab 127. 6 Q: That would be Inquiry Document Number 7 4000366. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: Okay? 13 A: Yeah. I'll read this to you, it's -- 14 it's handwritten. I don't have a transcript and it's a 15 bit of a difficult letter to read. But it was written by 16 William Jones who was the Indian superintendent and he's 17 writing from Port Sarnia which is where he lived. And if 18 you recall Sarnia is -- is one of the -- the larger 19 communities and it's also where there's the largest 20 reserve. The reserve that's over ten thousand (10,000) 21 acres. 22 So, this is where Jones actually spends 23 most of his time and he spends very little time up on 24 Lake Huron. So, he writes this letter in January of 1845 25 and he's writing to Colonel Clinch who's another Indian

111

1 superintendent. And Clinch is working -- he -- he's in 2 charge of the reserves on the Thames River like the 3 meridians of the Thames; the Care Dock (phonetic) 4 reserve. So, Jones writes: 5 "My Dear Sir. 6 I have the honour to acknowledge the 7 receipt of your letter by Mr. Chase of 8 the 13th instant in answer to which I 9 have to say that I have no means of 10 knowing what proportion the Walpole 11 Island Indian's enti -- what 12 proportion the Walpole Indians -- 13 Walpole Island Indians entitled to 14 share in the annuity bear to those who 15 were under my superintendent as I -- as 16 I have never been furnished with any 17 census of them since they commenced 18 being paid in money." 19 So just to explain that a little bit. 20 What he's saying is he doesn't know how large the -- the 21 Walpole Island population is as compared to the 22 population of the people at Sarnia, Kettle and Aux Sable 23 because he's never had any kind of a census given to him. 24 So, he gives you a little bit of an idea 25 of how much information some of the Indian

112

1 superintendents had of the people that they were actually 2 looking after. 3 And then he goes on to say, okay, so: 4 "I haven't been furnished with any 5 census of them since they commenced 6 being paid in money, and Mr. Keating's 7 appointment to their superintendence. 8 In 1838, Colonel Jarvis made the first 9 payment in money to all the Indians and 10 it was then agreed between him and them 11 as nearly as I can recall that those at 12 Walpole Island were in --" 13 Q: Where is -- I'm sorry, that was 14 "recollect"? 15 A: Oh, sorry, as long as I can 16 recollect. 17 "That those of Walpole Island were 18 entitled to three-elevenths (3/11th) 19 which I then thought was their full 20 share and from their habit of living, I 21 think they cannot have increased in 22 number since. 23 I recollect that when you were -- when 24 you was here last fall, I put into your 25 hands the copy of a return made to Mr.

113

1 Higgenson of the Indians under my 2 superintendent, entitled to share in 3 the annuity, by which you can see what 4 proportion the Aux Sable and Kettle 5 Point Indians bear in numbers to those 6 of Sarnia and Enniskillen. 7 From a memorandum with -- which Mr. 8 Chase made for me, they stand thus: 9 Sarnia, two hundred and fifty-nine 10 (259); Kettle Point, twenty-seven (27); 11 Wapagus's band" 12 And then in brackets "Aux Sable". 13 "Thirty-five (35); Quaykigouin's band 14 ditto, forty-nine (49), making one 15 hundred and eleven (111) or three 16 hundred and seventy (370) in all of 17 those under my superintendents." 18 And then the rest of the letter is some 19 personal stuff. He's talking about; are we going to get 20 a pension and some other personal business. 21 So, what we see in this is that he's -- he 22 -- this is -- this information that Jones is relaying is 23 information that he got from Mr. Chase and Mr. Chase was 24 a missionary and -- I believe a Methodist missionary. 25 And he had a --a circuit that he -- he

114

1 went around, visiting these communities. So, Mr. Chase, 2 the missionary has given Jones the Indian superintendent 3 a census of -- of how many people are living in this 4 community. 5 And the -- just -- just for interest sake, 6 the marginalia that's written up the side of that letter, 7 this is a -- extra comments that are written here, which 8 probably doesn't show very well in the -- in the binder 9 copy and I -- I have a -- I obtained another copy from 10 the archives, because I wanted to have a better read of 11 it. 12 And it's in this -- this notation that -- 13 that he talks about the fact that the goods that they 14 didn't -- they didn't bother taking a census previously, 15 because the goods that were owed as annuity payment were 16 just given to the chiefs and --at -- at what he called 17 several points, but he doesn't say what those several 18 points are. 19 It -- the -- the goods were delivered to 20 them in bulk and then the chiefs went about distributing 21 to the -- to the members as they saw fit. 22 So, the -- the other things that I just 23 wanted to say about this early period and -- and how the 24 -- how the Huron tract people were -- were being dealt 25 with by the Indian Department. Walpole Island -- the

115

1 people at Walpole Island had agitated to be separated 2 from -- from the rest of the -- the Huron Tract people as 3 early as 1836. 4 And you'll see in this letter that I just 5 read, that there's a reference to that, that -- that he 6 thought the proportion of the annuity that was supposed 7 to be given to Walpole was three-elevenths (3/11ths) 8 which would have been based on the relative population. 9 So, they started in 1836; Walpole Island 10 wanted to be dealt with separately, and there -- there 11 was that informal agreement, which is -- which is 12 referred to there, and that is also referred to in other 13 Indian Affairs documentation of this informal split of 14 Walpole Island, but it was never really made official 15 until the 1860s -- the early 1860s. 16 So, we see in that period from around 1836 17 to the 1860s, the -- the people at Walpole Island are no 18 longer seen to have any involvement in the four (4) 19 reserves, and their -- the portion of the annuity is 20 being dealt with separately with Walpole Island, and not 21 part of the -- the management of the trust fund money 22 from the annuity for the other four (4) bands. 23 So we see that Walpole Island splits off 24 quite early, and that left the people at Kettle Point, 25 Stony Point and Sarnia, as the -- the unit that the Crown

116

1 was dealing with under the -- the Huron Tract Treaty, as 2 -- as one (1) Band. 3 And just to -- to go back again to the 4 slide and realize that when Sarnia, Kettle and Stony are 5 all treated with -- as one (1) unit, that when you look 6 at those population figures that are shown in the chart, 7 that Sarnia has, you know, more than twice the 8 population. The Indian superintendent is at Sarnia, all 9 of the Council meetings are held at Sarnia so, the Sarnia 10 Band becomes much more influential in terms of decision 11 making; the Sarnia portion of the people. 12 They -- they have a closer pipeline to 13 Government, and -- and what we see in the next period is 14 that the people at Kettle and Stony point are -- become 15 very disenchanted with being dealt with, with the Sarnia 16 people and feel that they're -- that they're being 17 overpowered by them. 18 Okay, I'm going to move along to the next 19 slide, and in these two (2) slides I'm going to be 20 discussing another theme or an aspect of -- of the 21 history that was very contentious, which caused a great 22 deal of discord and dissent in the communities. 23 And it was what was always called the 24 American Indian problem, or the American Indians debate. 25 And I have two (2) slides on it, and I'm just going to

117

1 start off by jumping back a little bit in history and -- 2 and reminding us that the -- around the time of the 3 conquest of course, there was -- there was no 4 international border. And all of the area around the 5 Great Lakes, around Lake Huron, around Lake Erie, both 6 sides of the Detroit River, that was all British/Indian 7 country. 8 And the British had a relationship of 9 alliance with the tribes living in that area, and one (1) 10 of the ways that they expressed that alliance was by 11 distributing annual presents, and I talked about that a 12 little bit this morning. 13 So, all of these people living in that 14 whole Great Lakes area, and if you look on this map that 15 we have on the slide, which is an exhibit -- 16 Q: Exhibit P-5. 17 A: Thank you. All of the people living 18 in this area on both sides of what later becomes the 19 international border, the -- the Ottawa, the Potawatomi, 20 the Chippewa; all of these peoples on both sides of Lake 21 Huron, both sides of the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, 22 the Detroit River and around Lake Erie, they were all in 23 treaty alliance with the British. And the British gave 24 all of them presents. 25 When the -- at the end of the American

118

1 Revolution, and when the -- the international boundary 2 was established there were many -- many people living on 3 what was then became the American side of the border who 4 still had friendly relations with the British and the 5 British wanted to encourage their relationship with them. 6 However, the Americans really objected to 7 the British supplying presents -- giving presents to 8 these Indian tribes because some of the presents were 9 arms and the Americans were -- were fighting with the -- 10 the tribes at that time. 11 And the -- the Americans considered it an 12 affront to their sovereignty to have the Indian nations 13 that were living on American territory having such a 14 strong active tie with the British. 15 So, because of this, the British invited 16 the tribes who were living on the American side of the 17 border to come and settle on British territory and if 18 they did so, they would continue to receive their annual 19 presents. 20 So, there was, at a number of times, in -- 21 from the late 1700s, like, after 1796 until into the -- 22 the early 19th Century into the about 1840, the British, 23 on several occasions, invited American Indians to come 24 and -- the British did it for a couple of reasons. 25 One; because they -- they felt an

119

1 obligation and they were trying to protect their 2 relationship with the -- with the American Government. 3 So, all that long winded thing to say that the -- there 4 were many people who -- who the British had invited to 5 come onto British territory and this -- this precipitated 6 an influx of -- of people into these communities. 7 And I think I'll just -- I'll just give 8 you one example of in 1837 Jones, who was the -- the 9 Indian superintendent who we were just speaking about, he 10 reported on three hundred (300) immigrants coming into 11 that area. 12 And we see that in Document 24 which is at 13 Tab 4. 14 Q: That would be Inquiry Document 15 4000024. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 A: Okay. So, again this is -- this is a 20 letter written by Superintendent Jones. He's writing 21 from Sarnia and he starts his letter -- oh, sorry -- 22 who's he writing to? He's writing to the Indian -- the 23 Superintendent General of -- of the Indian Department and 24 he says: 25 "I have the honour to inform you that

120

1 since I made the return for 2 presents..." 3 Which is the last time he informed them of 4 how many people they had to give presents to that year. 5 So, okay, so 6 "... since I made the last return for 7 presents about three hundred (300) 8 Indians with their chiefs have come 9 over from the American shore with a 10 view to getting land to settle on. And 11 they have this day held a council with 12 the Indians of this place to know 13 whether or not they can get leave to 14 settle on this or any other of the 15 reserves belonging to this tribe. They 16 say that they have never swerved from 17 their allegiance to the British 18 government and wish to remain under the 19 protection of their Father, the King 20 and that about as many more of their 21 tribe wish to follow if they can get 22 leave to settle. They further promise 23 to leave off roving habits and to 24 become permanent residents. The Chiefs 25 of this place have given for answer

121

1 that they would agree to some of them 2 settling on these reserves provided 3 that it would be agreeable to His 4 Excellency, the Lieutenant Governor, 5 that they have been informed it was his 6 wish to have all the Indians of their 7 description go either to Manitoulin 8 Island or to Saugeen reserve. It is 9 therefore, the humble request of the 10 chiefs of this place, and of the 11 strangers, that His Excellency will -- 12 will be pleased to make his pleasure 13 respecting the matter known to them as 14 soon as he conveniently can. 15 The Indians of this settlement are 16 particularly anxious to have the others 17 disposed of as soon as possible because 18 in their present, unsettled state, 19 having a number of very poor and 20 destitute families among them and not 21 being yet altogether civilized, they 22 may commit serious depredation on the 23 growing crops. 24 It was suggested in the Council that if 25 the Walpole Island is not considered as

122

1 ceded land but still the property of 2 the Indians with the approbation of His 3 Excellency, a part of these Indians 4 should settle on this island, another 5 part here, another at Colburg and the 6 residue at some of the establishments, 7 to which the parties assented. 8 And consequently, they have requested 9 me to beg of you a prompt answer to my 10 letter of the 2nd ultimo. If it should 11 be His Excellency's pleasure to have 12 the whole or part of those Indians 13 settled on this river be -- this river, 14 be pleased to give me the necessary 15 instructions about their presents, 16 where I am to make out the new -- 17 whether I am to make out a new -- 18 whether I am to make a new requisition 19 or they are to -- to receive them 20 elsewhere". 21 So, in this letter we see that first Jones 22 is reporting this -- this large number of people, three 23 hundred (300) people which is -- you know, a considerable 24 population in -- in respect of the number of people who 25 are already there, that they came, that there was a

123

1 Council that the Indians -- and he says the "Indians 2 here", which one assumes he means the Indians at Sarnia. 3 They -- they want to know what should be 4 done. They -- they're willing to have people settle 5 there. They also make some suggestions of some other 6 locations which might be suitable for settlement and, 7 again, they're asking for permission from the Government 8 to -- to allow -- to allow the settlement. 9 Q: Just for clarification, part of -- 10 one of the -- at least three (3) of the reserves that 11 were being contemplated, were the reserves at Sarnia, Aux 12 Sable, and Kettle Point? 13 A: Yeah, they -- they don't -- he 14 doesn't name Aux Sable and Kettle Point specifically. He 15 says that they had a Council, the people of this place, 16 which is Sarnia from the Government's perspective. If 17 the government gave permission for the people to settle 18 at Sarnia, that permission would be equal to settling 19 also at Kettle and Stony because of the attitude that the 20 Crown had. 21 And they're also suggesting -- you know, 22 Walpole Island and some other places, yes. 23 Q: Because at this time, the government 24 was referring to Sarnia as inclusive of Kettle and Stony 25 Point?

124

1 A: Yes. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 A: So, a few years after this -- this 6 letter that we see from Jones, what happens is the -- the 7 British officials start to -- to become concerned about 8 so many people coming over from the American side. 9 So, they are a little bit reluctant to -- 10 to accept a lot of people and what we see is a statement 11 to that effect in the 1840's and, again, I'm going to 12 take you to the document, because I think it's an 13 important one and that is Document Number 26, and it's 14 found at Tab Number 5. 15 Q: That would be the Inquiry number -- 16 Document Number 4000026. 17 A: And I think that this -- this 18 document is -- is interesting because you can see in it, 19 in 1840 the -- the concern that the Government has, on 20 the one hand, they don't want to have a lot of Chippewas 21 or Potawatomis or Ottawas coming from the American side 22 and settling in the British territories. And, on the 23 other hand, they feel a certain responsibility or a 24 necessity to honour the -- the invitations that they've 25 been making.

125

1 So, it's a part -- it's an aspect of 2 justice -- their conception of justice. So, I'll read 3 the relevant parts of this. And, again, this comes from 4 Government House, from the Civil Secretary and he's 5 writing to the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada and he 6 says: 7 "The attention of the Lieutenant 8 Governor having been called to the fact 9 that a very considerable immigration of 10 Indians into the Province has taken 11 place and is still continuing has, 12 after serious consideration, come to 13 the conclusion that it is, by no means 14 consistent with the good of the Country 15 that a large body of Indian population 16 should take up their residence within 17 it and that no encouragement therefore 18 should be..." 19 And there's a part of the page torn off. 20 "... to them to do so. In order, 21 therefore, that the views of Government 22 on this subject ...." 23 And there's something missing. 24 "... made clearly known, His Excellency 25 should be -- His Excellency concluded

126

1 ..." 2 And then there's something missing. 3 "... should be distinctly understood by 4 the officers connected with the Indian 5 Department ..." 6 Something missing. 7 "... endorsement whatever is to be 8 given to this migration of Indians into 9 this province from the territory of the 10 United States. The Chief 11 Superintendent of the Indian Department 12 will, therefore, take the earliest 13 opportunity of impressing upon the 14 several superintendents and other 15 officers connected with the department 16 that the greatest care is to be taken 17 to avoid taking any steps having such a 18 tendency. The British Government, 19 however, being pledged to the Indian 20 race to afford protection to all the 21 Indians within the British provinces 22 where any such are found it will be the 23 duty of the Indian Department to take 24 care to give full effect to that 25 pledge. The object of this minute

127

1 being merely to prevent any means 2 whatever being used to induce or 3 encourage Indians into the country." 4 So, there's that document, if you -- if 5 you look at the photocopy of the actual document the -- 6 it's -- the page is torn and worn so there's blanks in 7 it. But I think that the -- the -- that the -- the 8 meaning is -- is clear in this is that by 1840 the -- the 9 Government is -- does not want to encourage immigration. 10 However, that they do feel that they -- 11 that they're honour bound and that they have a pledge 12 which must be -- which must be honoured. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Vella, 14 do you think we could have our afternoon break now? 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Certainly, this would 16 be a convenient time to recess. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Would this 18 be a good time? 19 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, thank you. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much. Let's take fifteen (15) minutes now. Thank 22 you. 23 THE REGISTRAR: All rise please. This 24 Inquiry will recess for fifteen (15) minutes. 25

128

1 --- Upon recessing at 3:15 p.m. 2 --- Upon resuming at 3:32 p.m. 3 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 5 resumed. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We can't 7 start without our counsel or witness. 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: They'll be here 9 shortly, Commissioner. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Good afternoon. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 16 afternoon. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 A: Okay. So just to finish up with this 20 slide what we've seen so far is that the British Indian 21 Department did invite Indian allies from the American 22 side to come and settle in Upper Canada. And those 23 invitations came through the period from about the 1790's 24 to the 1840's. 25 The -- the invitations in the latter

129

1 period in the 1830's to '40's, the content of those were 2 where the British Indian Department informed the Ameri -- 3 the so called American Indians that if they didn't come 4 and settle in Upper Canada that they would no longer get 5 any presents. 6 So that -- that sort of brought the last 7 onslaught of people onto the -- onto the British side and 8 a number of those people settled on the Huron Tract 9 communities and you see in the slide we did a little -- a 10 little circle graph and it showed the Chippewas and -- 11 and these again are Indian Affairs figures from around 12 1856. 13 The Chippewas at Sarnia, Walpole, Kettle 14 and Stony Point were about nine hundred and thirty (930) 15 people as of 1856 and people who had come from the 16 American side, Potawatomis, Ottawas and others who are 17 mostly other Chippewas that were settled on those -- 18 those same reserves was about four hundred and fifty 19 (450) people. So you can see it's about half again the 20 population who are so called American Indians settled on 21 those reserves by the mid 1800s. 22 The -- during this period what's happened 23 is we -- we looked a little bit before the break about 24 the -- the attitude of the government on whether or not 25 these people could come into Upper Canada, whether or not

130

1 they could settle on the reserves. 2 But the -- the other aspect of that was 3 although the Crown to a certain extent was willing to 4 have people come and settle in -- in Upper Canada and -- 5 and live on the reserves they were not -- they were of 6 the opinion that they -- that they should not share in 7 some -- in some of the benefits. 8 And in particular, we look at a letter 9 from 1843 that we already looked at that the letter from 10 Ross -- William Rossen, the Chief's secretary. And that 11 -- that document is Document 365, it's at Tab 94. We 12 already looked at the first part of the document but the 13 second part of the document which I -- I'll just read to 14 you now speaks to that -- the rights that the government 15 thinks that the so called American Indians should have. 16 And that was at Tab or Inquiry Document number 4000365. 17 Okay, so again this letter is from 1843 18 and it's an opinion of -- of the Governor and in the 19 very, very last paragraph of that letter, at the bottom 20 of the page it says -- Rossen writes: 21 "In order to endeavour to determine 22 this question properly --" 23 And he's talking about who has rights. 24 "His Excellency desires a report upon 25 the number of Chippewas in each of the

131

1 four (4) settlements who are strictly 2 entitled to share in the annuity. 3 Excluding the Indians from Saginaw and 4 other parts of the United States, who, 5 although they may be admitted to 6 privileges of the tribe, are not 7 entitled to share in the proceeds of 8 the land sales to the injury of other 9 portions of the tribe to whom they 10 justly belong." 11 So what he's saying is, these people who 12 have come from the American side, Saginaw being a -- an 13 American location, that these people who've come from the 14 American side, although government is willing to admit 15 them to some privileges of the tribe, they're not 16 entitled to share in the proceeds of the land sale. 17 And in this case, they're talking about a 18 sale of reserved land, because he considers that to be to 19 the injury of other portions of the tribe. So what he's 20 saying, basically, here is that while they will accept 21 them to come and settle, they are going to restrict the 22 types of rights that they have. So that -- and that's 23 from 1843. 24 So now I'm going to go to the next slide 25 and in this slide what I -- I'm going to talk about, I'm

132

1 going to cover some of the -- the period in the 1870's 2 and 1880 that has to do with how the people on the 3 reserves reacted to this -- the -- the American Indians, 4 which by this time, all these -- so-called American 5 Indians are usually called Potawatomis. Although, in 6 fact, they are likely people who are Potawatomis, 7 Ottawas, and Chippewas. 8 So the American Indians in the 9 correspondence, you'll -- you'll usually see them 10 described as Potawatomis. 11 So in this time period, some of the -- the 12 reserve communities decide to allow these people to 13 settle on their reserves and -- but the Indian Department 14 doesn't actually, formally sanction it and is sort of -- 15 varies in their attitude about what rights the people 16 should have. 17 So you see in this early period -- and 18 this -- this whole controversy about the rights of these 19 people, it continues on and on and on and is never really 20 resolved. And it's one (1) of the -- one (1) of the 21 underlying tensions, that -- that we see in the 22 community, and that's why I'm spending a bit of time now 23 to -- to sort of set the -- the situation. 24 So in -- in 1871, the -- the Department of 25 Indian Affairs makes a declaration about what so-called

133

1 American Indians are -- who -- which ones of them are 2 entitled to share in the treaty annuity. And they -- the 3 way that the -- that the Indian Department describes it, 4 is they -- they talk about people who had relocated to 5 Canada at the invitation of the British, right around the 6 time that the boundary was established which was in 1796 7 after -- sometime after the Jay Treaty. 8 Also the -- the people -- the -- I'm going 9 to keep calling them American Indians, just to have a 10 term to refer to them by, but it really is not a very -- 11 it's not a very accurate term. 12 Q: So what you're really referring to 13 are aboriginal people who happened to be on the American 14 side of the territory -- of a boundary -- political 15 boundary, but that of course, didn't exist before? 16 A: Yeah, exactly. And these people -- 17 Potawatomis, Ottawas, Chippewas, these are all people who 18 used both sides of the border, traditionally. They 19 ranged over that entire Great Lakes area. 20 So when the -- when the boundary was fixed 21 after the American Revolution in 1784 and then really 22 came in -- didn't really come into force until after the 23 1794 Jay Treaty and the British withdrew all of their 24 posts by 1796. 25 So in that period, that border was

134

1 established which made -- created in -- in the minds of 2 the Crown, the British and the American Crown, the -- the 3 establishment of that border created what they called 4 American Indians and British Indians. 5 But in fact, they're the same people. 6 They just happened to be on either side of a -- of a 7 border which was imposed by other government. So -- so 8 I'm going to keep calling them American Indians. It's 9 just as a way to identify them so I don't have to go 10 through a long explanation every time, that's -- that's 11 who I mean. 12 So, what the British Indian Department 13 through was the American Indians who should be entitled 14 to -- to share in the annuities or the treaty rights of 15 the -- of the Chippewas of the Huron Tract were those 16 that had come to Canada upon the invitation of the 17 British shortly after the Canadian US boundary was 18 established. 19 Those who had been born in Canada from 20 parents who had resided on the American side and, because 21 those people were what they considered, entitled to the 22 protection of the British Crown because they'd been 23 allies, that those people were entitled to share into -- 24 in the -- the payment of annuities and in the interest 25 money.

135

1 So, when Indian Affairs was talking about 2 interest money, they're talking about money that has been 3 raised by the sale of resources from the reserves and 4 funded in that trust fund that belongs to the Huron Tract 5 Band; okay. 6 And the other thing that -- the other 7 determination that the Indian Department made in 1871 is 8 that anyone who had immigrated relatively recently which 9 they didn't define what relatively recent was, but anyone 10 who had immigrated relatively recently and squatted on 11 the Indian Reserves, they were not to be entitled. 12 So that they were not to get treaty 13 benefits and they -- and they didn't have right to live 14 on the reserve. 15 So this was the -- the decision of the 16 Indian Department in 1871 but that term of who was to be 17 excluded, these people -- these relatively recent 18 immigrants, they didn't define what they meant by -- by 19 "recent". So, -- 20 Q: So we're left with an ambiguity then? 21 A: Yes. It's very ambiguous. I was 22 trying to think of a polite way to say that. It was not 23 well drafted opinion. 24 So, as a result of that, we see at that 25 time period and actually in -- in the report, in the

136

1 middle of page 25 of the report, the Indian Agent in 2 1872, which is the year after that decision, he describes 3 the communities at Kettle Point and Sable Reserve and I 4 think -- I'll just read it to you from the report. 5 The Indian Agent says that, quote: 6 "The total number of Chippewas on the 7 Kettle Point reserve is fifty-six (56). 8 And on the Sable reserve, ten (10). 9 The foreign Indians are Potawatomi and 10 number thirty-eight (38) but they have 11 almost all been born here -- there. 12 The three (3) heads or patriarchs of 13 the little band Wahdahsega, Manedookah 14 and Wolf..." 15 And excuse my pronunciation. 16 "... and Wolf, have come -- come there 17 from Wisconsin thirty-eight (38) years 18 ago..." 19 Which would be around 1836. Then he goes 20 on to say: 21 "These Potawatomi are not oppressed in 22 any way by the Chippewas. On the 23 contrary, they are getting more and 24 more connected with them by inter- 25 marriage. But they are naturally

137

1 anxious and all more so in view of the 2 recent agitation against foreign 3 Indians at Sarnia and Walpole Island 4 that a title of occupation of the only 5 -- of only home they know should be 6 guaranteed to them. 7 Ambitious with all, they seem to 8 cherish an expectation that the badge 9 of inferiority will by and by be 10 removed altogether by their 11 incorporation into the Chippewa Band 12 and admission to their money 13 privileges." 14 So, according to the Indian Agent, which, 15 as we can remember, an Indian Agent is not always 16 apprised of all the facts and his -- his interpretation 17 might not be exactly accurate, but what he's saying is, 18 at Kettle Point and Sable there's a total of sixty-six 19 (66) Chippewas, the bulk of them being at Kettle Point, 20 and that there is Potawatomi, thirty-eight (38) in 21 number, who are living there. 22 And he doesn't really -- it's hard to -- 23 to deduce from the way he words it, if they're all living 24 on one (1) reserve or the other; it's hard to -- he 25 doesn't really explicitly state that, where they're

138

1 living. 2 But what he says about those people is 3 that they came from Wisconsin around 1836, and they're -- 4 they now are -- most of them have been born there and 5 their parents came around 1836, and he says, you know, 6 that they're intermarried. 7 And what we see in this, that -- that's of 8 particular interest, is that there's obviously agitation 9 at Sarnia and at Walpole Island to get rid of, or to 10 limit the rights of what he's calling the foreign 11 Indians. 12 So, we see the beginning of -- the 13 beginning in terms of the records, the historical record, 14 we see this -- this controversy over the right of these 15 people is coming to a head, and this is in -- in 1872. 16 Q: And is it fair to say that just as we 17 approach this era, that the Government has effectively 18 created classes within classes of aboriginal peoples, in 19 terms of the entitlements, that they're -- that certain 20 aspects of the Band can now receive from the Treaty, and 21 you know, different forms of differentiation in that 22 respect? 23 A: Hmm hmm. 24 Q: Did that cause some difficulties? 25 A: Yes, it does. And they -- by they're

139

1 -- their decision, their 1871 decision, they're saying 2 there's people that have certain rights and people that 3 don't have other rights. And of course, parallel to this 4 at this time, in general, in history, as -- as the -- the 5 Federal Government, because this is 1871, it's after 6 Confederation, which took place four (4) years earlier in 7 1867 the -- the Dominion Government is starting more and 8 more to -- to define and restrict who are Indians, who 9 are not Indians, who are Treaty people, who was in a 10 band, what uses they can have, who has rights to 11 membership, who has not. 12 So, the -- the creation of these classes 13 of people on Kettle and Stony Point and Sarnia, in terms 14 of whether they are you know, the old guard Chippewa, who 15 have always been on British territory, or if they are 16 people who came from the American side that -- that 17 classification is being intensified and brought to the 18 fore, and it's obviously resulting in tensions within -- 19 withing the community about what rights these people 20 should have. 21 So, there's the sort of the classification 22 as in all -- and I'm speaking generally about Indian 23 Affairs in general here, that the categorizing of people 24 with more rights and less rights, is -- it happens on a 25 legal level, through Indian legislation. And it -- it

140

1 becomes absorbed to a certain extent, in communities. 2 And so the -- the categories and the -- 3 the classification of people becomes a -- a major set -- 4 a major source of discord. 5 Q: Discord within the communities 6 themselves? 7 A: Within the communities, yes. 8 So, in -- so, we've seen from this 9 document that there is objections brewing in Sarnia and 10 Walpole Island, against the so called foreign Indians. 11 And the following year, in 1873, there's a -- the people 12 at Kettle Point and -- and Stony Point, Aux Sable, pass a 13 resolution adopting some people into their communities. 14 And I'm going to take you to that 15 document, because it's an interesting one (1) to read. 16 It's Document 37, and it's found at Tab 9. 17 Q: And that's Inquiry Document Number 18 4000037. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: And we should be looking at a Band 23 Resolution from Kettle Point and Aux Sable, dated 24 December -- is it December 5th, 1873? 25 A: Yeah and it's a -- if you see the --

141

1 the image in your -- of the document, it's a document 2 that's been damaged. The paper is torn off on -- on -- 3 one side. And it's dated at Kettle Point and it's 4 addressed to the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs 5 who's the highest authority in the Indian Department. 6 And it was actually -- it looks like it 7 was actually written by David Sawyer and Joshua Greenbird 8 who are both teachers in that location. And you see at 9 the bottom it said -- read, explained and something in 10 the presents. And then it's got their names. So, to me 11 that -- that suggests that they were -- it was one of 12 them who did the actual writing and probably the 13 interpretation of it. 14 And it -- it reads as follows: 15 "To the Superintendent General of 16 Indian Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario. 17 We the old men and young men of Kettle 18 Point and Sable Reserve have assembled 19 in Council. We do hereby agree to 20 adopt all in our band that Pota --" 21 And it's cut off it's Potawatomi brethren. 22 "who are immigrated -- who are 23 immigrated from the United States to 24 Canada many years ago and have been 25 settled with us ever since are sober

142

1 industrious men, loyalists and many of 2 them are pious. 3 We think -- 4 Q: Sorry, I think it's many of them "our 5 friend," perhaps "our friend"? 6 A: I have to resort to my magnifying 7 glass. 8 "many of them are pious" 9 Which would be at that time period a very, 10 very important recommendation to give somebody. Okay, 11 many of them are pious. 12 "We think it is high time for us to do 13 so. That they become [and there's 14 something cut off and I think it's] 15 members, in our band with and share 16 with us two lands and annuity. The 17 enclosed is the [something] number of 18 individuals and that it's [something 19 cut off] family consisting of twenty- 20 nine persons and we are" 21 And then we see the names written; they're 22 not actually signatures. 23 And unfortunately most of them are cutoff 24 but some of the last names are Johnston, Shawnoo, 25 Johnston. Anyways it's -- it's difficult to see them but

143

1 there -- there's a number of names written there. So, 2 they make this resolution in council to adopt the 3 Potawatomi and have them share in -- in the annuities and 4 lands. So, the annuities and lands would be the benefits 5 of the Treaty. 6 And in the -- in the -- the historical 7 records we find a letter from the Deputy Minister of -- 8 or the deputy to the Minister of the Interior who was 9 also the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs at that 10 time, writing back to the school teacher at Kettle Point 11 and saying that -- that they had no objections to this. 12 There -- there's a number of -- of other 13 documents that speak to this same issue of adopting the 14 Potawatomis or accepting them. For -- just as an 15 example, in 1878, there's a -- a document by sixty-nine 16 (69) residents from -- and this time it's from Sarnia, 17 Kettle Point and Sable, and it's a one (1) head chief and 18 four (4) second chiefs that write this -- this petition, 19 and they want to protect the -- the American Indians from 20 being removed, and this is because there's -- there's 21 this ongoing agitation on the part of some parties to 22 have these people removed from the reserves. 23 Q: And that was Inquiry document number 24 4000039, the Petition? 25 A: Yes.

144

1 Q: That's dated 1878? 2 A: Yes, and that's at Tab 10. 3 And the -- one (1) of the interesting 4 things about that document is at the end of it there are 5 the signatures of -- of all these people, and well, 6 they're not signatures, they're -- they're names written 7 out actually. And there's sixty-nine (69) of them. 8 The first -- the first number which appear 9 on the second page of that document, all appear under the 10 name Sarnia Reserve Indians, and there is -- 11 unfortunately the numbers are cut off, so there's 12 probably close to thirty (30) names. Well, more than 13 thirty (30) names there. 14 And then when you turn on to the second 15 page you'll see, and again, this is a document that's 16 been torn, so it's very difficult to read it. But down 17 in the corner, the very bottom corner of the document, 18 you see Point Indian, and the first name on it is 19 Shawnoo, Chief, and then the rest of the names, and it 20 looks like there's probably -- probably about ten (10) 21 names there. 22 And then at the very end of the list 23 there's three (3) names under the heading Walpole 24 Indians. 25 So, you see on that -- on that petition,

145

1 and that petition came from the Council House at Sarnia 2 in 1878. 3 Q: And that was a total of sixty-nine 4 (69) signatures -- 5 A: Yeah, sixty-nine (69) names, yeah. 6 Q: Names, yes, okay. 7 A: Because whoever wrote this also wrote 8 all the -- all the names, it's all in one (1) hand. 9 Q: All right. Was the -- was the 10 attitude within the communities -- those communities at 11 Sarnia, Kettle Point and Aux Sable, uniform with respect 12 to whether or not the Potawatomi should be adopted or 13 they -- 14 A: No, I don't think it was. Clearly 15 there was -- there was agitation at Sarnia and Walpole, 16 so against, so to speak, the foreign Indians about having 17 been removed. 18 We see in some of the documentation that 19 some of the people from Kettle Point and Sable, blamed 20 the Head Chief Wawanosh at Sarnia, for creating this 21 controversy. But there was also some -- I think in some 22 of the later documents you see that even at -- at Sarnia, 23 the -- or at Sable and Kettle Point, there were some -- 24 some discomfort or -- or some attitude against the -- the 25 Potawatomis or the foreign Indians.

146

1 The -- because of all of this controversy, 2 the -- the Indian Department decided to launch an 3 investigation, and they -- they sent out an official to 4 interview people at the reserves, and they also reviewed 5 some departmental files, and this took place in 1878 to 6 1880, and they -- the Department -- the Department came 7 up with a decision or a finding, and the -- the reports 8 are on -- on that investigation are very lengthy. 9 They -- they went and they talked to 10 people. They interviewed people about other people and 11 they wrote a -- a long -- a long report on it. And the 12 -- the documents are Documents 46 and 47. 13 I'm not going to -- I'm not going to go to 14 them because they're extremely detailed and beyond -- 15 beyond what we -- what we need to look at here. But, 16 basically, the Department reached certain conclusions and 17 I -- I summarize those conclusions in the report on page 18 26 and I'll just -- I'll just go briefly through them. 19 And this -- this summary on page 26 which 20 is indented is not a -- a direct quotation from 21 documents. It's a summary of the contents of those 22 documents. And it's based on the -- the report of the 23 investigating officer who is Superintendent Watson. 24 Q: The report dated March 18, 1879? 25 A: Yes. And then his report is 1879 and

147

1 then -- Vankoughnet who was the Deputy Superintendent 2 General of Indian Affairs, he summarizes those findings 3 in 1880 and passes them on to the Superintendent General. 4 So, this -- this summary is sort of -- it 5 -- it encapsulates the attitude of the Indian Department 6 at that time. So, basically, what they say is -- and I'm 7 going to go through this summary that I've provided on 8 page 26 and on to twenty-seven (27) of the report says 9 that the Chippewa Band of Sarnia and Walpole Island 10 represented four hundred and forty (440) individuals who 11 entered into treaty in 1827 in return for a perpetual 12 annuity and reserved lands on the St. Clair River and 13 Lake Huron. 14 Q: And just for clarity, the Chippewa 15 Band of Sarnia is meant to include Sable and Kettle 16 Point. 17 A: That's correct. And then he goes on 18 to say, in 1837 to '40 period a number of Indians, mainly 19 Potawatomi and American Chippewas moved to Walpole and 20 Sarnia. And, again, that includes Kettle and Stony 21 Point. 22 These individuals were welcomed by the 23 principal chiefs and invited to participate in the 24 distribution of presents, though apparently in smaller 25 amounts and as, and this is a quotation, "a mere

148

1 indulgence granted by the other Indians" end quote. 2 After the conclusion of the US treaty 3 three (3) or four (4) chiefs chose to relocate their 4 followers to the Sarnia Reserve rather than to establish 5 themselves on the new reserve established by government - 6 - Ameri -- the American government beyond the Missouri 7 River. 8 So, that he's talking about why -- why 9 some of these people came. Okay, then he goes on to say 10 that there was another large influx of American Indians, 11 largely Potawatomi, who arrived in 1839 and '40. 12 And then there's further migration in 13 subsequent years, but smaller numbers of people. Then -- 14 then he says in his report that under the superintendency 15 of William Jones, which was 1831 to '43 and then Keating 16 who was 1839 to 1860, and this is a quotation "large 17 numbers were admitted into the Band" end quote. 18 Most likely with the concurrence of the 19 chief. So, he's saying that, you know, more of these 20 people were admitted into the Band. Though in the early 21 years these new members likely did not receive the 22 annuity in full, in later years they have shared -- their 23 share was equal to that of the original treaty Indians. 24 So this is -- these are things that he's 25 gathered in his investigation. Then he goes on to say

149

1 that -- that the newcomers did not initially participate 2 in the distribution of annuities, that they were given 3 smaller amounts than the treaty Indian. 4 But, over time, more and more of the 5 foreign Indian were admitted into the band as the result 6 of inter-marriage. And then by 1879 the original four 7 hundred and forty (440) band members had thus increased 8 to one thousand, one hundred and eighty-seven (1,187). 9 So he's saying as -- this is what he's 10 determined from his -- from his investigation that -- 11 that all of this -- or that most of this increase was due 12 to foreign -- so-called foreign Indians coming through. 13 Then he goes on that by about the mid 14 1860s, through this process of gradual integration, the 15 strangers had come to outnumber the original habitants of 16 the reserve, and in so doing, achieved a majority of 17 votes in band elections. 18 And this seems to be part of the 19 contention that's -- that's arisen, is because there are 20 people in the communities who feel that these so called 21 foreign Indians by this time, are -- hold the majority 22 vote in Council, and therefore can upset the -- the 23 business of the Band. And there are people who believe 24 that this is not -- not right, because they're not 25 original inhabitants.

150

1 So what -- what happens after this is as a 2 result of this investigation, Indian Affairs comes to a 3 conclusion that there are about sixty-one (61) families. 4 And they say on the Sarnia Reserve, but when you look at 5 the people who they document, there are people who are 6 not on the Sarnia Reserve, but are living in the Kettle 7 and Stony Point communities. 8 But the -- the investigator decides that 9 there's about sixty (60) -- sixty (60) families who 10 aren't entitled, and there's about ninety-two (92) 11 families who are, and initially they want to remove those 12 people who they've determined are not entitled, to remove 13 them from the pay list. 14 However, the Superintendent General 15 decides that they should not interfere with the existing 16 arrangement. So, this is a -- this is kind of an example 17 of how the Indian Department, they investigated a 18 situation, they come up with particular conclusions, they 19 think that they should act in one (1) way. 20 But after considering it they decide, no, 21 let's leave well enough alone. We're not going to 22 disturb the status quo, so they're not -- those people 23 were not taken off the pay list, they -- they remained 24 on. 25 And if you can imagine the impact of that,

151

1 that leaves some people quite unhappy. 2 Q: Because they have a fixed amount of 3 money that's being divided in there, how large the pool 4 is? 5 A: Yes. And as I explained before, it's 6 not like people are getting so many dollars every year 7 per head, but this money is being spent for the benefit 8 of the communities. 9 And there's only so much money to go 10 around, but there are many more people who are in need of 11 things like -- all the things -- the kinds of things that 12 they would spend money on at that time would be things to 13 do with improving the land. Sort of what we would 14 consider infrastructure on the Reserve, like if it's 15 ditches or roads or building a Council house, assisting 16 in housing, which they did very little of at that time, 17 but there'd be things for the general benefit of the -- 18 of the community. 19 So it's like you've got a -- a pie of a 20 certain size, but you have to share it among more people. 21 So that's what causes a lot of -- a lot of tensions. 22 The -- this controversy -- again, because 23 the controversy of course doesn't go away, and you 24 continue to have in a historical record, you see all 25 kinds of people petitioning back and forth, and wanting

152

1 this -- this situation to be resolved, and it's not 2 really being resolved. 3 And in the mid 1880s, around 1883, some of 4 -- some of the -- the Chippewa, a particular group, had 5 engaged a local lawyer to make a complaint against the 6 outsiders. 7 And because the -- the lawyer is involved, 8 the Department of Indian Affairs takes the issue and 9 submits it to the Department of Justice, looking for a 10 ruling. 11 And this is -- this is what Indian Affairs 12 would do in this time period, and in fact what they still 13 do, is when they're faced with a -- an issue of who has - 14 - who has what rights, or who should have rights, or is 15 the Indian Department administering or managing in the -- 16 in the correct way, they -- they send the question to the 17 Department of Justice for a determination. 18 The Department of Justice is, in a sense, 19 a lawyer, working for the Department of Indian Affairs, 20 does their -- their legal consultation. 21 So it went to -- to the Department of 22 Justice. And in 1885 the Department of Justice gave an 23 opinion and I summarise that opinion on Page 28 in the 24 report. And the Department of Justice considers who is 25 to be entitled to the annuity coming out flowing from the

153

1 treaty. 2 And they say that people who are of the 3 blood or have inter-married with the Chippewas are 4 entitled. Anyone who's been adopted by the Chippewas and 5 therefore, in a sense, have become Chippewa are entitled. 6 And anyone who's participated in the distribution of the 7 annuity for a considerable time with the consent of the 8 Chippewa. 9 So that's the way the Department of 10 Justice categorizes that. Again, there's no definition 11 of considerable time, so that -- that is a bit of a 12 vagary. 13 And I think, actually, I'll read you that 14 document because it has some interesting reasoning in it, 15 and the document is Document Number 55 and it's at Tab 16 14. 17 Q: That's Inquiry Document 4000055. 18 A: And I have a -- I have a transcript 19 of this document and actually there's some typos in the 20 transcript which I'll correct as I read through it. 21 Q: And this is a document dated February 22 16, 1885? 23 A: Yeah, and it's from George Burbidge 24 who was the Deputy Minister of Justice at the time, and 25 he is writing to Vankoughnet, who's the Deputy

154

1 Superintendent General of Indian Affairs. 2 And he writes: 3 "I have held back the answer to your 4 communication of the 11th July 5 respecting the Chippewas of Chenail 6 Ecarte and St. Clair --" 7 Which again that includes the people at 8 Kettle Point and Stony Point as it refers to the people 9 in the Huron Tract treaty, 10 "-- whose reserves are situated in the 11 County of Lampton at the request of Mr. 12 Bercher who visited me personally about 13 the matter before the reference was 14 disposed of. He called upon me this 15 morning and now be honoured to 16 communicate to you my view respecting 17 the question." 18 And here's what -- here's how he discusses 19 it. He says: 20 "By the Treaty of 1827, his Majesty 21 covenanted to pay yearly at every year 22 in perpetuity to the Indians of the 23 Chippewa nation then inhabiting the 24 tracts surrounded," 25 Surrendered, sorry,

155

1 And to their..." 2 And that should read "posterity", 3 "The son -- the sum of eleven hundred 4 (1,100) pounds and it was agreed that 5 in the distribution..." 6 That should be "to", 7 "each individual composing that part of 8 the Chippewa nation which had 9 heretofore inhabited and claimed the 10 said tract and..." 11 Should read "each individual", 12 "of their posterity should be entitled 13 to an equal share. In the first place, 14 then, it appears clear that the 15 Chippewas inhabiting that tract and 16 their descendants are those who are 17 entitled. But the word posterity is, I 18 think, capable of a wider meaning than 19 this as applied to a band or tribe. 20 I am informed by your that formerly" 21 And --and I think it should be "by you", 22 sorry, 23 "That formerly an Indian could lose his 24 status as a member of the tribe to 25 which he by blood belonged and become

156

1 to all intents and purposes a member of 2 a tribe adopting him. 3 If there are any such Indians now among 4 the Chippewas they can, in my opinion, 5 by fairly and properly..." 6 Be fairly, excuse me, 7 "Be fairly and properly described as 8 being of the posterity of the Chippewa 9 nation. Then again, I am of opinion 10 that in the case of Indians or their 11 descendants who have with the consent 12 of the Chippewas themselves, lived 13 among them and shared in that 14 distribution for any considerable 15 length of time. The Chippewas should 16 be considered to be equitably estopped 17 from now disputing the right of such 18 Indians to so share in the 19 distribution. 20 But it would be clear that the 21 Chippewas consented --" 22 Excuse me, 23 "But it would be clear that the 24 Chippewas consented and they ought not 25 to be prejudiced by anything done which

157

1 they were not in a position to prevent 2 if they did not give their consent 3 hereto. 4 I am -- I am of opinion therefore that 5 those only are entitled who: 6 1) are of the blood or inter-married 7 with a Chippewa; 8 2) have been adopted by the Chippewas 9 and have thereby become to all intents 10 and purposes Chippewas; 11 3) have participated in the 12 distribution for a considerable time 13 with the consent of the Chippewas. 14 And that those who do not fall within 15 any of these classes should have their 16 names struck off the list. Perhaps I 17 should add that I hold the view I have 18 expressed more strongly in respect of 19 the fund arising from the sale or 20 leasing of land than I do with respect 21 to the annuity provided for by the 22 Treaty. 23 If the Chippewas would accept this view 24 of the case you might possibly think 25 favourably of appointing a commission

158

1 to enquire into the matter and report 2 as to who are and who are not 3 entitled." 4 So his -- his opinion enumerates a lot of 5 people who should be included and -- and excludes others. 6 He -- it is of course a little bit vague in that he gives 7 his opinion and then he says, well, in terms of money 8 arising from sales of land, I -- I think that the -- this 9 criteria should have -- should apply. And then as far as 10 the annuity is concerned he's a little less certain. 11 So it's a kind of a -- it -- it's an 12 opinion that has a lot of vagaries. 13 Q: It's an unusual situation of a lawyer 14 hedging that -- 15 A: Yeah, I didn't know how to quite say 16 that but I think that that's about it. He has says on 17 this hand, on that hand. I -- I think one (1) of the 18 interesting things about it is that he acknowledges the 19 practice of -- of adopting people into a -- a corporate 20 body into -- into a tribe or into a band and recognizes 21 that as a practice which perhaps should apply in -- in 22 this case. 23 Q: And what flowed from this opinion if 24 anything? 25 A: Nothing very definitive. The -- the

159

1 controversy continued. You see in the historical record 2 that people are still complaining one (1) way or the 3 other. Either of people being excluded and not getting 4 the annuities that they think that they are entitled to. 5 And you see people complaining that there are still so 6 called foreign Indians or American Indians living amongst 7 them who are getting benefits. 8 So the -- after all of this back and 9 forth, investigations, collecting data on individuals and 10 going to the Department of Justice and there isn't 11 anything definitive and concrete that happens as a result 12 of it at this period. 13 So I'm going to go on to the next slide 14 and the next slide is actually a series of two (2) 15 slides. 16 Q: This references an aboriginal report 17 at pages 28 and 35? 18 A: That's correct. And in these two (2) 19 slides I'm going to talk about another bone of 20 contention, an issue that -- that also creates more -- 21 more controversy and -- and more discord within the 22 community and it's -- it's really centred around a couple 23 of different issues. 24 The -- the ongoing issue of the -- the 25 proper rights of the Potawatomis or the American Indians

160

1 and the -- the -- the survey and the sub-division of the 2 -- the reserves at Kettle and Stony Point. 3 Q: And just -- just for clarification, 4 you're -- you're now looking at the Sarnia Band 5 consisting of the Sarnia Reserve, the Upper Reserve that 6 is, the Kettle Point Reserve and the Stony Point or Aux 7 Sable Reserve? We're not referencing, at this point, the 8 Lower Reserve or the Moore Reserve or Walpole Island. 9 A: That's correct. The -- the Moore 10 Reserve had been surrendered away so it no longer exists 11 as a reserve and the Walpole Island people have -- they 12 successfully, I guess from their point of view, 13 successfully separated from the rest of the Huron Tract 14 people in 1860 and you'll see I -- I have a reference to 15 that on the slide that the Walpole people separated in 16 1860 and that the Department continued to call the rest 17 of the people from the Huron Tract group; they called 18 them the Sarnia Band. That was the name that the Indian 19 Affairs gave them and that Sarnia Band had the Sarnia 20 Reserve, the Upper Reserve, the Kettle Point Reserve and 21 Aux Sable or the Stony Point Reserve remained with them. 22 So, in these two (2) slides I'm -- I'm 23 talking a lot about a couple of different things that are 24 happening which causes or -- or precipitates a struggle 25 on the part of the Kettle Point and Sable people to be

161

1 separated from the Sarnia Reserve. 2 And this is mostly activities that happen 3 in the 18 -- 1890s right up to around the -- the turn of 4 the century, 1900. The -- the Sarnia Band, if you 5 remember, the Band as a whole was dominated by the 6 portion of the people who resided on the Sarnia Reserve 7 because they were more than double the population of the 8 people at Kettle and Stony. 9 And the -- there was -- there was a 10 movement that started in the -- the mid-1880s for sure, 11 that agitation within the Sarnia Band council to have the 12 Kettle and Stony Point Reserves surveyed and sub-divided. 13 And the people at Kettle and Aux Sable 14 resisted that. And it -- I'm going -- I should explain 15 that a little bit to you because the sub-division of a 16 reserve doesn't sound like a very contentious kind of 17 issue. It seems like a technical thing to send a 18 surveyor in there and divide up a reserve. 19 But what was kind of at the heart of that 20 was the Indian Department had a program at that time 21 where they wanted all reserves to be subdivided into 22 individual lots and to have individual families given 23 what they'd call a location ticket which was like a 24 permit to use a particular piece of land. 25 And part of the Indian Department

162

1 rationale for this program was they believed that by 2 settling individuals on individual plots of land that 3 have been sub-divided, giving them a location ticket, it 4 would encourage those individuals to settle down and to 5 farm and basically to be like white people; to live that 6 kind of individualistic lifestyle. 7 So that's what the sub-division -- what's 8 behind the sub-division. 9 Amongst First Nations, and -- and here I'm 10 speaking in general, not just the -- the Kettle and Stony 11 Point situation, but amongst many First Nations, people 12 felt that they did not want their reserve subdivided, 13 they wanted to maintain a kind of a lifestyle and a land 14 use and ownership system, which was more traditional to 15 them, and in which individuals had -- had a right to go 16 around the reserve land, to use resources, to reside 17 where they wanted to. 18 So, it becomes, in some sense, a bit of a 19 struggle between maintaining a more traditional approach 20 to land use and occupation, or adopting the Indian 21 Affairs regime of the subdivision of reserve of the -- of 22 the settling and the location system. So, that's in part 23 what's going on, behind -- behind that struggle. 24 And we see in the -- in the historical 25 documents through the -- through the 1880s and on into

163

1 the 1890s, Petitions from people at Kettle and Stony, who 2 are asking not to have their reserve subdivided. And 3 they are feeling overwhelmed and bullied by the people at 4 Sarnia, who want this done, because they've already had 5 this done on the Sarnia Reserve. 6 And so there's -- there's that -- there's 7 that pressure between them, and it's one (1) of the 8 reasons why they want very much to be separated from the 9 Sarnia band, so that -- the Sarnia portion of the band, 10 so that the people at Sarnia cannot in effect, make 11 decisions about the reserves on which they're residing. 12 Q: And, just to clarify, the reason why 13 that was occurring was because there were more people 14 residing at the Sarnia Reserve, than on the other 15 reserves combined -- combined, meaning that they had -- 16 that they tend to have more votes on Council? 17 A: Yes. And because, going back to that 18 original Indian Affairs approach that they were one (1) 19 band, and that they had a common undivided interest in 20 all of the reserves, if something was going to happen on 21 one (1) reserve, then all of the people who belonged to 22 that -- what Indian Affairs called that one (1) big band, 23 had a right to vote on the -- the treatment of the land. 24 So, they -- they were outnumbered, they 25 could never, in essence, win a vote, if -- if people on

164

1 the Sarnia Reserve had a different opinion than they did. 2 So, there's -- there's a number of -- of 3 petitions, and I think I -- I will take you to a few of 4 them. I'll -- I'll read a petition, which is Document 5 Number 64, and it occurs at Tab 17. 6 Q: And that would be Inquiry Document 7 Number 4000064; it's a Petition dated September 28th, 8 1885. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 A: Okay. So, this -- this Petition, 13 again, I have a transcript here -- 14 Q: Okay, could you just perhaps -- 15 A: Sorry. 16 Q: -- bring the microwave -- not 17 microwave. Microwave -- what am I thinking of -- 18 microphone closer to you. Thank you. 19 A: Is that better? 20 Q: It must be getting towards the end of 21 the day. 22 A: It's suppertime, talking about 23 microwaves. Okay. 24 Okay. So, this document is from 1885, and 25 it starts off -- again it's a addressed to the

165

1 Superintendent of Indian Affairs and it reads: 2 "A petition of John Johnson, Chief of 3 the Sable Indians and Adam Shahnow, 4 Chief of the Kettle Point Indians and 5 other Indians of the same Band hereby 6 showeth, number one, that the Indians 7 of Sarnia, Kettle Point and Sable 8 Reserve have been united and treated as 9 one (1) Band in any dealings the 10 Department of Indian Affairs from time 11 to time have had with them. Number 12 two, the Indians of the Kettle Point 13 and Sable Indians ..." 14 Oh, excuse me. "... the lands ..." I'm 15 getting tired. I'm sorry. 16 "... the lands of the Kettle Point and 17 Sable Indians are distant about thirty- 18 five (35) miles from the Council house 19 on the Sarnia Reserve and the interests 20 of the Indians at Kettle Point and 21 Sable are not at all identical with 22 those of the Sarnia Reserve. 23 Number 3, the Sarnia Reserve Indians 24 number about four hundred (400) while 25 those of Kettle Point and Sable number

166

1 about one hundred and eighty-eight 2 (188). 3 Number 4. There are about eight 4 thousand (8,000) acres on the Sarnia 5 Reserve and about twenty-four hundred 6 (2,400) on the Sable and Kettle Point 7 Reserves. 8 Our Council -- Number 5, Our Council 9 governs the affairs of the Indians of 10 the three (3) reserves and heretofore 11 owing to the preponderance in numbers 12 of the Sarnia Indians, whenever grants 13 have been voted by the Council to be 14 expended in improvements for the 15 general benefit of all the Indians of 16 the three (3) reserves, it has been 17 ..." 18 And then the last two (2) lines of the 19 document are cut off. Then continuing on the next page: 20 "... which we would mention the 21 building of roads and bridges, about 22 one thousand dollars ($1,000) in two 23 (2) years..." 24 So I think what they're doing is they're - 25 - they're enumerating money that's been voted by the

167

1 Council to be spent. Sorry, I'll just start there again. 2 "... which we would mention the 3 building of roads and bridges, about 4 one thousand dollars ($1,000) in two 5 (2) years, culvert ..." 6 Illegible word. 7 "... et cetera, and a school house. 8 The two (2) houses for two (2) aged 9 Indians of the Sarnia Band cost two 10 hundred dollars ($200). 11 The cost of brass instruments for a 12 band and a hundred and fifty dollars 13 ($150) to a band master, none of these 14 expenditures benefited, in the 15 slightest extent, the Indians of Kettle 16 Point and Sable Reserve. But being in 17 a minority, they could not prevent the 18 expenditures being made. Number six, 19 on the Sable and Kettle Point Reserves, 20 no money has ever been expended on 21 roads or bridges, nor is there a school 22 house in the Sable Reserve, all of 23 which wants are very seriously felt. 24 Number seven, since the year 1869, 25 constant efforts have been made by the

168

1 Indians of the Sarnia Reserve to have 2 the timber of the Kettle Point and 3 Sable Reserves surrendered to the Crown 4 so that they might share in the benefit 5 to be derived by the sale of same. And 6 in the month of June last, at a general 7 meeting of Council it was resolved, 8 although strongly opposed by the Kettle 9 Point and Sable Indians, that the said 10 timber should be surrendered to the 11 Crown. 12 Number 8, there is constant friction 13 and discord between the Indians of the 14 Sarnia Reserve and those at Kettle 15 Point and Sable. And they never have 16 been able to pull together and it would 17 greatly tend to the peace and harmony 18 of the Band if they were ..." 19 And, again, the last two (2) lines are cut 20 off. Going to the next page: 21 "Number 9, the land now allotted to the 22 Sable and Kettle Point Indians have 23 been the hunting grounds of their 24 respective tribes and their property 25 since the Revolutionary War and they

169

1 feel very ..." 2 I think that word is "keenly": 3 "... at having their property 4 controlled in this way by the other 5 Indians. 6 Number 10, by giving to the Sable and 7 Kettle Point Indians the land on their 8 reserves, the said lands would only be 9 -- would only be the proportion they 10 would be entitled to having referenced 11 to their numbers compared with that of 12 the Sarnia Reserve Indians and the 13 lands remaining to them." 14 And then this is their resolution which is 15 at the bottom and which is the one (1) that shows on this 16 -- on this slide and it says: 17 "Your petitioners, therefore, pray that 18 the Kettle Point and Sable Reserves may 19 be separated from the Sarnia Reserve 20 and that they may have control, as one 21 (1) band, of all the monies to which 22 they are from time to time entitled to 23 from the Crown and their share of any 24 monies now held by the Crown in trust 25 for them."

170

1 So in this petition you see that they're 2 enumerating all the complaints they have and what they 3 believe is the affect of having this one (1) big band 4 structure. They go through all those specifics of how in 5 their view all the money is being spent on the Sarnia 6 reserve and they're not getting anything spent on them 7 basically. 8 And they're asking at the end that they -- 9 that they be separated from the Sarnia, the people of the 10 Sarnia reserve and be created as one (1) band. And that 11 they have control over the money from time to time 12 entitled from the Crown which would be the annuity money 13 from Treaty 27. And that their share of -- of money held 14 by the Crown in trust for them. 15 Because by that time the -- the large 16 Sarnia band had trust money that had -- was a combination 17 of money that had come from the annuities that hadn't 18 been spent and money that had been raised because they 19 had actually surrendered a fair bit of land and resources 20 on the Sarnia reserve which went into that pool. So 21 they're asking for that share -- their share of that and 22 the reserves. 23 Q: And you -- you said Treaty 27 but you 24 mean Treaty 29? 25 A: Sorry. Treaty 29, yeah, the 1827

171

1 Treaty. 2 Q: Thank you. 3 A: So as a result of that -- and that's 4 one (1) example of the petition. In the -- in the 5 historical records there are several other petitions. 6 Some that come jointly from Sable and Kettle Point 7 together and some that come individually from them. 8 As a result of that, the Department made 9 an investigation. They get around to doing that in 1892 10 and they conclude that -- that the separation is not in - 11 - in the interest of these people. So the Department -- 12 Q: The Department -- 13 A: -- doesn't positively respond to 14 their petition. They -- they basically say that -- that 15 they should not separate. And that would be -- that 16 would be a typical kind of departmental response from 17 that time period because the one (1) thing that -- that 18 the Department was not in favour of was small, small 19 bands. 20 In fact, the Department wanted people to 21 amalgamate rather than to separate. They wanted larger 22 bands, they wanted also people to be settled on larger 23 reserves and not -- not split into smaller units because 24 a smaller unit was more expensive from an administrative 25 point of view.

172

1 Q: And then also the Department 2 determined that there might be another reason for a 3 motivation underlying the request for separation? 4 A: Yes. And you'll see that in -- in 5 the document that the -- where the Department makes its 6 decision. They believed that the only reason or the 7 primary reason why they wanted to separate was -- they 8 wanted to have the ability to sell off timber which the 9 Department determined was an illegal use of timber. 10 Because they would be selling -- selling 11 it off and keeping the proceeds for themselves rather 12 than having the Department sell it for them and fund the 13 proceeds. And this would be another kind of typical 14 conflict between Indian Affairs and a First Nation of who 15 has the right to control resources and to get the 16 immediate benefit of those resources or the control of 17 the benefit of the resources. 18 Okay, I think I have time to go to the 19 next slide and -- and just finish up that piece of it. 20 So after -- after many years of this back and forth 21 wanting the separation and the Sarnia portion of the band 22 pressing for the subdivision, the -- the subdivision of 23 the -- of the reserve does happen. And it -- this -- 24 this vote to have the reserve subdivided is in fact a 25 really clear illustration of the problem that the Kettle

173

1 and Stony Point people were raising in their petitions. 2 And you'll see on this slide what I have, 3 which is so very difficult to read, is the records from a 4 Council meeting, and a Council meeting that took place in 5 Sarnia. 6 And basically what the -- what the -- the 7 -- the decision was that -- and I'll -- and I'll read 8 what's written on that slide for you, he says: 9 "After a considerable discussion -- or 10 after, a considerable discussion took 11 place. It was moved by Francis W. 12 Jacob, seconded by James Minesse 13 (phonetic), Junior, to set apart fifty 14 (50) acres of land on the southeast 15 corner of the Stony -- the Stony 16 Reserve -- Stony Point Reserve, for 17 those Potawatomis as a final gift. And 18 it was carried by twenty-one (21) of 19 the majority, thirty-eight (38) for, 20 seventeen (17) against." 21 And I'm actually, I apologize, I'm getting 22 a little bit ahead of myself. 23 The -- there was a vote to have the 24 reserve subdivided, and in that same meeting, they also 25 made a determination that once the reserves were

174

1 subdivided, that this fifty (50) acres in the southeast 2 corner of the Stony Point Reserve, would be given to the 3 Potawatomis, and they call it a final gift. 4 So here we see the -- the controversy of 5 the subdivision of the reserve, and all of that 6 contention about what were the proper rights of the 7 Potawatomis, or the foreign Indians or the American 8 Indians, these things come together. 9 And so by the vote of the Sarnia portion 10 of the reserve, they made this decision to set aside this 11 fifty (50) acres. And then the next thing you see on 12 this -- this minute, the second paragraph, it says: 13 "A general meeting of Kettle and Stony 14 Point Indians was also held on the 15th 15 day of March for the same purpose as 16 above, but the Indians refused to vote 17 one (1) way or the other." 18 And it's signed by the Indian Agent and 19 the secretary, Francis W. Jacobs. 20 So, what we see in that is that the -- the 21 decision is made that there's going to be a subdivision 22 of the reserve, and there is this vote to set aside these 23 fifty (50) acres. 24 The people from the Sarnia Reserve caused 25 that to be passed by a vote, but even their vote, it's

175

1 thirty-eight (38) in favour of the fifty (50) acres, and 2 seventeen (17) against. 3 And then the people from Kettle and Stony 4 Point refused to vote on that resolution. So, because 5 under the rules of the way of doing business in a Band 6 Council, the Indian Affairs rules, if people refuse to 7 vote, it's -- it's not a vote for or a vote against. 8 And so the -- the thirty-eight (38) people 9 who voted for, carried the resolution. And that -- that 10 decision to set aside that fifty (50) acres for the 11 Potawatomi, causes a huge controversy on the reserve, 12 major upset. The -- the people at Kettle and Stony Point 13 are extremely, extremely distressed by it. 14 And the -- despite their -- their distress 15 and their opposition to both this -- this subdivision and 16 the -- the fifty (50) acre gift plan, it -- it goes ahead 17 and it's -- it's approved by an order in Council, that 18 these -- this Potawatomi -- excuse me, the -- the fifty 19 (50) acre scheme goes ahead. And the Potawatomis who 20 feel that they're being displaced, many of them decide 21 that rather than being shunted off into this fifty (50) 22 acre parcel, which is a very small parcel of land, that 23 they're going to return to the United States. 24 And this is what becomes known as the -- 25 the dispossession of -- of these people, or the

176

1 deportation of these people, leaves extreme distress in 2 the community. And the Department of Indian Affairs 3 decides that these people who are leaving will be bought 4 out, that they will -- that they'll be paid out of the 5 funds of the Band, they will be paid for their -- their 6 improvements. And -- and that's what's approved by an 7 order in Council, is paying them that money out of the 8 Band funds. 9 Q: Up to this point in time, up to this 10 Band Council resolution, the Potawatomi within the Band 11 are free to reside on any of the three (3) reserves? 12 A: Yes. And -- and we know that -- that 13 they were residing in -- in different places on the 14 reserve, and that many of these people had, from -- if 15 you remember that description of -- of the communities in 16 1872, many of these people had actually been born there, 17 and -- and were intermarried and -- and part of the 18 community. 19 Q: Right. And did the Department of 20 Indian Affairs then sanction, if you will, this Band 21 Council resolution through the authorization of paying 22 out, if you will? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: All right. 25

177

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: All right? 4 A: Yeah. I'm just looking at the time, 5 we have ten (10) more minutes. And I think I can go to 6 my last slide really quickly, if I -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's do it. 8 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to? 9 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Certainly. 10 THE WITNESS: Thank you. And I hope I'm 11 not skipping over things -- 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 14 Q: Well just before you get to that, 15 page 32 of your report, and perhaps you're going to go 16 over this, but you have a chart, the Kettle Point 17 surnames and Stony Point surnames? 18 A: Right. 19 Q: I was just wondering if you could 20 perhaps spend a few moments -- 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: -- explaining that. 23 A: Okay. 24 Q: Before we get -- 25 A: Sorry, yeah, I started focussing on

178

1 the -- the fifty (50) acre gift and -- and forgot to 2 talk a little bit about this subdivision. 3 When the -- part of the subdivision was -- 4 part of the reason that the -- the Department wanted it 5 was the Department felt that it was important to define 6 the boundaries of -- of the two (2) reserves, because 7 there had been questions about where the boundaries are. 8 The surveyor, whose name is Davidson, went 9 in there in 1900 and he surveyed the boundaries, and he 10 made some -- some maps of -- of the reserve, some plans. 11 And he talked about where people -- where people were 12 living at the time. 13 And on page 32 of the report, you see a 14 little chart there that I made up, and he talked about 15 the -- the lots -- one (1) of the things that he said 16 was, and this figures later in the history, is Davidson 17 looked at the shoreline of Kettle Point and Stony Point 18 and said, oh, this looks like it would be a good area for 19 development, for recreational development. 20 And he went through and he -- he noted on 21 his plan where people were actually living. And again, 22 this surveyed plan is useful for identifying where some 23 people were living when Davidson went through there in 24 1900. 25 It's likely that he didn't capture every -

179

1 - every individual name and every location, because these 2 things are often missed, but what he would have -- what 3 he would have captured would be the more -- the more 4 obvious locations of people. 5 And so the chart I have on page 32, I -- 6 what I just listed was some of the surnames of people and 7 where they were living. 8 So in the left hand column you see under 9 the Kettle Point surnames, these are names that showed up 10 on Davidson's plan. There were two (2) individuals with 11 the last name of George, the surname James, Alexander, 12 Bresette, there were four (4) individuals under that 13 name. Greenbird, Shawana with a peculiar spelling, three 14 (3) individuals listed there, Cloud, Shawkence which has 15 four (4) individuals listed, Davis, Pewash, Southwind and 16 Thomas. 17 And then when you look at the name on the 18 Stony Point Reserve again there's the surname George with 19 five (5) individuals listed, James, Henry, Johnson 20 there's five (5) individuals listed there. Wolfe, 21 there's a name which Quakegas Barwequa which I'm very 22 unsure of -- of that name and the surname Elijah. 23 So those are -- are some of the names of 24 people who are residing on those reserves when Davidson 25 went through.

180

1 Q: Does that mean the day that the Band 2 Council at Sarnia approved the subdivision at Kettle 3 Point? 4 A: Yes, they did. And that was in 1901 5 and again, you know, this is the Band Council that is 6 dominated by the Sarnia portion of -- of the Band at that 7 time. 8 Q: So is it fair to say that by 1901 the 9 residences of the Kettle and Stony Point reserves have 10 lost two (2) significant votes. One (1) being the 11 subdivision of the -- those reserves and the second being 12 the assignment of the Potawatomi to the fifty (50) acres 13 on the Stony Point reserve? 14 A: Yes. That would be correct and you 15 see the -- the bad feeling about that continues. So the 16 -- just going onto slide 14 to finish up here, the -- the 17 people at Stony Point and Kettle Point continue to want 18 to be separated from Sarnia. 19 And the things that we've been talking 20 about, the treatment of the Potawatomi, the subdivision 21 of the reserve, all those issues about -- about land use, 22 about how the joint money is spent. All of those things 23 contributed to their dissatisfaction. 24 Finally by 1919, the Department of Indian 25 Affairs consents to divide the Sarnia band. And under

181

1 the Indian Affairs protocol, they divided into two (2) 2 Indian Act bands. So they -- one (1) band that was 3 created was the Sarnia band and the Sarnia band kept the 4 Sarnia reserve and a per capita share of the annuity and 5 the trust fund. 6 So based on how many people were residing 7 at Sarnia, that's how they apportioned the -- the capital 8 share of the annuity and how they apportioned the trust 9 fund. And the Indian Act Band that was created which 10 Indian Affairs called the Kettle and Stony Point Band, 11 they kept the Kettle Point reserve and the Stony Point 12 reserve. And they got the balance of the annuity and the 13 trust fund based again on their relative population. 14 And just to finish up, if you wonder why 15 the Department of Indian Affairs finally consented in 16 1919 to separate the Band, there is a -- a very -- a very 17 small short document which is found in the historical 18 record and it's -- it's a document that -- from the 19 Deputy Superintendent General who is Scott at that time. 20 And you see it quoted on page 37 of the Report and he 21 writes this little memo which is found in the -- Indian 22 Affairs records and the memo is -- is in relation to the 23 separation of the Band and it says I'll read it here: 24 "The -- attached memorandum to His 25 Excellency and Council is a good

182

1 advance towards obtaining a surrender 2 of a portion of the Sarnia reserve 3 which the Department is endeavouring to 4 accomplish. The diverse interest of 5 the two (2) sections of the Band 6 presented a majority vote on any 7 question of important." 8 And then he goes on to say: 9 "When the agreement is accepted by His 10 Excellency and Council we will be able 11 to deal separately with the bands and 12 will no doubt in due course obtain a 13 surrender of the Sarnia band of the 14 portion of the reserve which is 15 required for the expansion of the city 16 of Sarnia." 17 So without being too cynical, what that 18 note from Scott leads one to believe is in 1919, because 19 the Department of Indian Affairs was interested in 20 obtaining a surrender of part of the Sarnia Reserve for 21 development purposes, they assented to this long sought 22 division of the Band because they thought that it would 23 make it easier for them to obtain a surrender of the 24 Sarnia Reserve. 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you.

183

1 Commissioner, I believe that this is an 2 appropriate place to take the afternoon -- to end the 3 afternoon. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I think 5 so. I think this is an appropriate place to end the day. 6 Thank you very, very much, Professor Holmes. It's been a 7 long day for you. 8 We adjourn to tomorrow ten o'clock? 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ten o'clock. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We adjourn 11 until tomorrow, ten o'clock. Thank you all. 12 THE REGISTRAR: All rise please. This 13 public Inquiry is adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, 14 August 18th at ten o'clock. 15 16 --- Upon adjourning at 5:00 p.m. 17 18 Certified Correct, 19 20 21 ____________________ 22 Wendy Warnock, Ms. 23 24 25